UnGovr Transcript
iHow this transcript is madeUnGovr transcribes the official recording with automated speech-to-text, separates speakers by voice, and matches voices to the seated roster. Names and attributions are AI estimates and may contain errors.Verify any quote yourself: click anywhere in the transcript and the official video jumps to that exact moment, so you can check any quote against the recording.Scheduled start 6:00 PM · clock-time estimates pending review
0:00 – 0:065 turns
Call to order, please. Welcome to the February 28th, 2023 meeting of the Ojai City Council. Could we have the roll call please, Weston? We have quorum.
Roll call — called by Weston Montgomery
Show transcript
Agenda Discussionitems moved / continued / pulled — click to expand
And before the approval of the agenda I just wanted to say a few words. First of all let's all take a deep breath in and out and let's realize that we are all connected and we're all here because we love our town and while we may disagree on policies we need to remember that we're all members of the same community So let's model civility and kindness, and model the behavior we want to see for our children. Let's all be the change that we want to see in the world.
Ohio is committed to being an international peace. We've been an international city of peace since 2014 so let's live it, let's do it. I also wanted to ask for council consensus on the placement of the
public comments from the account. I want to get consensus from Council before we approve the agenda, so I've heard many opinions from both sides some people really liked it at the end some people wanted to put it that at the beginning In the interest in finding a balance and a compromise between completing important city business and people's desire to speak earlier in the evenings, I'd like to propose a compromise.
My proposal is that we start public comments at 8 p.m., for a maximum of 30 minutes. And if there are still people after that who would like to speak they can do so at the end of the meeting. So this would also give opportunity for the people who are not listening now to speak at the end of the meeting And of course we want to hear from everyone so I'm asking council how they feel about that compromise.
Um, I think it's I think the compromise works I when I voted last week to have the meet the to move the Comments to the end it was I thought I was voting specifically for that week because of what we had talked about with the previous meeting not having enough time for rent stabilization and for reach codes and And I also, I want to just comment on something that Robin Gerber wrote to us all in online on the public comments and also something I'd heard from one of my, one of the members of my district who had a great conversation with about this issue. And there was a suggestion that we That we talk about this openly, that we don't make this a continuing issue that we're carrying on from week to week. And that we actually bring it as an agenda item and talk about it with the community, with participation so that we can make up a protocol, new protocol That includes more, you know all of our voices and the voices that feel like they're not being heard right now.
And so I'd like to also just suggest that we...I think for tonight a compromise. I think Sousa actually you brought this up last week of having some... Okay, go ahead. But just I mean I think for tonight it makes sense to have a compromise but I do think that we need to talk about this openly with the community.
He
tried times certain The problem is that by then, I foresee we're going to be really... That's two hours from now. We could be very deep into discussing the Reach Code so it will have our train of thought. It's already hard enough to keep our train of thought. It could interrupt the public comments on the Reach Code. You know, we don't know where we'll be in the meeting at 8 o'clock.
So that's the drawback and also The City Council protocols clearly state that public comments come after the presentation and there is, that's on page 23. And on page 26 it does, you know, there's rules and there's ways to manage public comment. You can get a show of hands for example as to who's actually here tonight to speak on public comments that are not on the agenda You can, you know when someone is speaking on an item that's on the agenda that's during public comment they need to be stopped immediately. In the past we've been a little bit lax and that takes up time but for in the way I look at public comments it's actually for items not on the agenda that's actually my favorite time of the meeting it gives me a time to kind of settle into the meeting It helps me to relax.
I love the people that are speaking, I know most of them because to my way of thinking we're a small town community meeting and this is not just a business meeting. The business is super important. We absolutely need to control the length of time. I'm fine with 30 minutes and you as mayor if there's something, you know there might be exception and you as mayor can extend that time but it does say Any of the foregoing rules may be waived, my majority vote of the council members. And that's what we can do right now when it is deemed that there is good cause to do so based upon the particular facts and circumstances involved. So I think we need to justify this eight o'clock wait I'm very happy to have a compromise like that, but I still feel that the protocol is that public comments for 30 minutes.
That seems fair are at the beginning, the very beginning of the agenda is my line of thinking.
0:06 – 0:1110 turns
Yeah, I think we do have to recognize that there are people here showing for agenda items. There are people here showing for public comment so if we put one in front of the other then we're disadvantaging the people who came for the other part of it. So any way we do it somebody's going to feel like they've been you know put to the end
I'm just asking for quiet from the audience. Thank you. Andy, do you want to finish?
Yeah. So any way we do it, somebody's going to feel like they've been put to the end of the line when they came, you know, to speak. So I like the idea of having a 30-minute public comment session for tonight. I think 8 o'clock is a good idea. I like Rachel's idea that we should have an agenda item and discuss how to handle it moving forward So at a future meeting, maybe the next meeting we can take that up and I did see multiple public comments along the ideas of limiting public comment to one minute.
So that we can get through potentially close to 30 people in a 30-minute session and I also like the idea of having 30 minute session for public comment With the People who don't get called having the opportunity due to speak it near the end of the meeting
Okay all right well it sounds like we have excuse me I yeah yep I'm just want to say yes sounds like we have consensus but go ahead um
so a couple of things i think susa is very correct. We are at eight o'clock, we're in the middle of the agenda perhaps we're hearing comments on a particular item and do we say excuse me No more comments on this item, we'd actually like to go over to a non-agendized item. I mean that's going to be awkward at the very least. We're gonna stop our flow and we're gonna say okay now non-agendized items. I agree it should be a community discussion But I think as a matter of compromise, perhaps we do 30 minutes at the beginning of the meeting today and then we figure out what's the best way to work. Because I just see it – I just see we're in the middle of something and all of a sudden we're going to stop. That to me is, it stops the flow.
And also there are people that come here, you know the library guy I wish, and you know I've talked to him a number of times, the woman from the art center. You know are we gonna ask them to come at eight o'clock? There's a lot of people that just wanna come and make a statement about what's going on in the city. And I think that it's sort of, it's inappropriate to ask them till eight o'clock If we were to do time certain for 30 minutes, basically it's not really going to affect the comments on agendized items for all intents and purposes.
So I firmly and clearly think that as a matter of compromise that we do 30 minutes today Starting the normal time in the normal way so that we don't have this change in flow There are people here who were expecting to make general comments It doesn't make sense to me right now to decide for eight o'clock I'm not saying that in you know down the road or when we have the public comment and when we we have a discussion Maybe it is time certain but Johnny did do that and he did decide it didn't work For exactly the reasons that Sousa has stated
Okay, thank you. Oh and well we do have consensus for eight o'clock so Susa you want one more time?
First
of all I think it would be proper for you to ask for a show of hands For people who are here to speak during items not on the agenda And follow the rules in the council protocols which allows you if there's many people speaking on the same topic You can ask them to pick a spokesperson And also, I believe there are people here who this is completely unexpected to them. They may have driven from Goleta or Camarillo. We don't know. They don't know that they have to wait two hours.
Well just a reminder that on this particular agenda it's at the end right?
We've had a number of speakers who drive long distances anticipating that they're going to be able to speak around 615. That does happen.
0:12 – 0:1725 turns
And I agree with Rachel's idea that we should talk about this. Tonight, it sounds like we have consensus majority to have it. Let me finish my sentence. You know, I'm going to remind everyone that there is no cross-talk so please let people finish. So it sounds as if we have consensus. Go ahead, Rachel?
I was just wondering if we do have them at eight, is there any way that we could make provisions for people with
disabilities? Yes. And I was going to as a courtesy to Mrs. Kemper, Joan Kemper, I was gonna ask if Mrs. Kemper would like to speak at the front of the meeting. I have a point of order.
Point of order? I would like to ask the city attorney, are we required to provide a reasonable time and would 8 o'clock be considered that reasonable time if so? Thank you.
There's no law that dictates what time within the meeting that we take public comment as long as we provide public... Take the opportunity for public comment at some point during the course of the meeting. If a request is received for a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act, it will be reviewed and evaluated if a formal request is received.
And who reviews and evaluates?
It would come to the city attorney, city manager and mayor and then be communicated through there to the City Council.
So would a decision be made by, who would make the decision and how would the vote go? Just curious. It would be in
the end made by the City Council.
Okay so if there was an accommodation that was asked about it would go to you, it would go to the city manager, it would go to the mayor, and then it would goto a vote for the council. Is
that correct? Correct. And depending on what it is when we receive such accommodations from past they're able to be resolved simply, they're resolved simply. If they're not able to be resolved simply then it comes to the council We haven't received, to my knowledge, no requests for accommodations this evening. Although I'm gonna ask the manager to confirm whether that's true or correct.
I received one and I've recommended that we take it up front to address the accommodation. I'd still recommend that but it'll ultimately be the decision of the City Council.
So it will come to us? Okay. Yeah,
I think we're sort of in process.
All right so is there consensus to move it to eight o'clock all in favor?
I feel like you
never recognized my request that you ask who in the audience wishes to speak on items not on the agenda. Maybe there are only three people!
Well, you know we it in in the published agenda It's supposed to today. Hey Susan Susan, please do not interrupt me. It's at the end of the meeting So what we're recommending is that we move it to eight o'clock and make a compromise per for example Bill Miley suggested that you suggested that last time so All in favor of moving it to
I'm not through with comments Thank you You know, I would I would like to make a comment. I would like to second Susan's concern with following protocols, there's a reason that they're there and they they're not really to be changed willy nilly. It was a unilateral decision that came to Council last time last session and was voted on. But there is a reason why we have protocols and it really isn't. It seems to me that if you have rules, if you're going to change them at every council meeting because you want to or what's the point of the rules?
I think that they're a little bit firmer than three votes can change anything here because then why have anything really? And I think that that is Suze's point and people worked very hard on this document
I hear both of you and as it as Susie you quoted we can move the time. I did talk to the joint powers authority And it's very common in lots of different cities to have at the beginning the middle or the end It's moved around quite a bit, so that's confirmed So at this point I think it's up to we've got to move along and get You know some city business done so all in favor of having it at eight o'clock aye Aye okay All right, so we have a council majority to have it at 8. So let's do that and then we can discuss it at a later date. Edward, could
we make
a later
date
certain please? Yeah I was going to ask. It seemed like there was maybe a consensus and I think so that we don't have to have the debate every week to have it on the next agenda. If that works, we'll include that as the item on the next agenda.
And then just a reminder that these are our board meetings, and it's the time for us to do business. And give direction to staff so that they can do the work. So we want to create and maintain an atmosphere at our meetings in which we can attend to business efficiently, fairly, and civilly. So I ask all of you to strive to be our most gracious selves, focus on policies versus personalities And to that end, please refrain from side conversations, clapping and of course booing. Please turn off your phones and if you need to talk, please go outside so I would love to invite Mrs. Kemper to the podium if you'd like to speak now?
0:17 – 0:3134 turns
Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. Who said that old age and disability doesn't have advantages? You're allowing me to talk to you! Thank you. I have lived here more than 35 years and in this valley I live...I can't vote, I don't live in the city, you all know that But for 35 years, I've been working with the majority of nonprofits in the Valley. And this has been a wonderful—I've been lucky—a wonderful experience. But it's been a very, very collaborative effort where we have invited citizens that are stakeholders to come for discussions, planning and ultimately help on the final decisions of these organizations.
And so it was really a team effort, and it was very successful. I'm talking about the land conservancy, the music festival, the restoration of Libby Bowl, the rebuilding of the pergola. These are major, major non-profits here and they're very successful today because of I think the collaboration and the input of their stakeholders and the community. And I'm sorry to say, I don't see that here today.
And I hope this conversation you've just been having is to the point. We do need more citizens' input and so on, and it's hard to do, I know. You have a lot on the docket but we have to get it in. And that's, I hope you do because I think the city has always been run that way And the valley has always existed that way. And I think that's the way to go, and I'll close with two questions. One is what's happened to the housing committee that was requested by citizens? Has that been formed? Question one.
Question two, I really would like the answer as to how in the world The city approved legal services to the firm of Shoot, Mulaney and Weinberg. How did that happen? This is question two. Thank you for your attention.
Thank You Mrs. Kemper All right. Is there a motion to approve the agenda? Motion to approve Yeah, I move. Okay, all in favor? Approval of the agenda? Aye. No.
Microphone please. I'm not approving the public comment part because council protocols expressly put public comments for items not on the agenda after the consent calendar. So, I approve the agenda except for that one item.
So would we have to take a vote to override the council protocols in order to change the agenda and then vote
There's no need for a separate vote to override the protocols. The protocols contemplate adjustments in any given meeting, and that was what was done with the prior majority vote to set general public comment at 8 p.m. for 30 minutes with the remainder of the comment taken at the end of the meeting. So now the item is to approve the agenda as modified. Council members who dissent may vote no.
Okay all in favor of approving the agenda?
Aye
I
know.
No, okay all right we will continue there are no presentations tonight we have a commission report from chair Smitty West the Arts Commission.
All right everyone happy? Well arts are something to be happy about this is on of course Winston Churchill when he was asked Should we cut the arts budget in favor of the military? And he said, but then what are we fighting for? And in the spirit of the Magna Carta, I'd like to welcome past chair and current commissioner and senior commissioner Nigel Chisholm and my friend Philip because these things are so big. I needed two people. So we got Phillip here too.
So I'm happy to address the council and James good to see you again Matthew Thank You Chief Trina Welcome I know we need her here. I have the pleasure to say that the Arts Commission has recently met over three days during the last month to do visioning, to help us deliver to the council per the ordinance what is a long overdue required... Sorry. We're going to just flip through a five-year plan. And so I just wanted to celebrate and have you guys see some of the work, this is just sort of we'll flip them around so they can see them too but in envisioning exercises where you take stock of where you are now and it's both a strategic planning exercise but it's also an exercise How to make group decisions and how to collaborate as well. So please just kind of look at these as they go by, and know that by ordinance we define arts in Ojai is the visual and the fine arts, the performing arts which include music and dance and drama.
Maybe we'll just keep going because I'm only 10% through my thing here too. Film, literary arts...I believe that art is the best that we can be here in Ojai because it energizes the community, it excites the community, it entertains the community It can unite and connect diverse groups as well, celebrate diversity and culture. And also honor our stewardship of our environment and our nature around us as well.
It's something that no matter where you come from, what language you speak, what you look like we all share that together so it's a great unification investment in our community Now it is our job in the Arts Commission to advise the council to steward our public arts budget. Public arts are 2% for the arts and I'm just here to say that it was a very Constructive process for the commission and we're very excited to you just see sort of the visioning and the ideas and ultimately Planning that we're going to come up with so but I can tell you that what will happen now And we'll hope to deliver you this plan in one month is we're doing it inventory of The art who actually physically you may have noticed. We changed some things in here in the room during the inventory of the art In the in the council chambers, so we're doing inventory of our art.
We're doing inventory of our stakeholders Our other commissions as well Businesses in the community schools in the community were survey surveying the arts organization artists are lovers government And we're also working on an economic impact study to see what the arts brings to our community in dollars and cents. We're outreaching to other arts commissions in other cities, both large and small, just to make sure that we use best practices in what we do as we do our planning.
And we're also reaching out to other commissions in Ojai so that we can get our best commission practices and make sure that we're doing it the right way. All right, what you can expect in our five-year plan is both our budget request and our organization and our management structure will be in five different buckets. It'll be the public art. There will be our grants program which has been one of our most successful historic programs. It gives directly back to the artist community education communication, and technology support as well. We envision that one day we're a hub not only for artists in the community but for consumers of art, for government, for funding sources where they can come together and these days that cannot be done without technology so we'll have an emphasis and investment in technology support both for our inventory and for our actual bringing together of our different stakeholders.
Long-term goals we talked about is on one of these sheets here will be that to have a major public art installation somewhere in the city, to have a physical space. Every one of our commissioners when they were quietly closed their eyes and envisioned this sort of perfect world of what arts was like in Ojai said there's a place Some people said it's in Europe, some people said it's at the Libby Bowl.
Some people said it's at the Swimming Hole but it was a place where people could come together and it was the center maybe not we don't do everything but at least create that hub and that center so uh... that's what you have to look forward to us I hope you'll consider doing a similar exercise it was very fruitful for us and these boards go into a big online central database so that we can access them and refer to them, and they've become part of the archives that will be representing the future of art here in Ojai. So let me just close with paraphrasing my favorite violinist, Albert Einstein.
And why not?
Wherever I go, I find an artist has already been there. So thank you for letting me share.
I did have a quick question if I could? Yes, please. So I think on one of your panels, you had explored sort of climate and climate sustainability. And I would be very interested in speaking with you about that as we move forward to see how the arts could be integrated into the larger city holistic plan that we're hoping
for. There's beautiful installations and ideas going on around the world that are celebrating and marking this very important benchmark in our history of humankind.
Yeah, I think it would be
where we hit our planet with a different attitude.
Great thank you, thank you very much. Susan?
Smitty did this come about maybe I missed it at the beginning was this something that came out of a workshop?
Yes, you guys approved a budget for us to hire a facilitator, a visioning facilitator. And we spent a Saturday all day, a Sunday all day and then half of another Sunday walking through these exercises that are sort of best practices when you have this big job to do and you're working with people that you might not have chosen to work with and you want to come out at the other end with something That's a group decision, because that's what politics is.
And it honors and supports the people we all work for which is them over there.
So the facilitator had the idea for these boards?
Yes, this is a practice. This is a vocation to... It's sort of like strategic planning but it's very often used in government arts organizations where you may not have chosen who you're working with
And
was that was that noosa the one that we use some
all
King yes, okay the one we considered for our workshop. Yeah Thank you
Just gonna add to Smitty's point the Arts Commission I think it's something like every five years is supposed to update and I forget the exact term but it's something like an arts master plan for this city and And we are way overdue, we were overdue before the current art commissioners were there. So it's not any fault of their own but to their credit they're taking on the heavy lifting to kind of get us back into that so yeah.
Great thank you thanks Smitty exciting looking forward to it.
Thank you how about a hand for these guys?
Yeah heavy lifting! ** Thank you very much. All right, we'll move on to the consent calendar. Is there a motion to approve? ** I move to approve.
** We were going to pull... Yes, I want to make a motion to pull a consent item. So I had was tasked with the choice... ** Can we wait?
Do you know which item is F?
** That is item F.
** Okay. ** E. ** I'm sorry, yes.
0:31 – 0:5641 turns
I'll move to approve.
I second, okay all in favor? Aye
Okay. Yes, so I had selected someone for the Historic Preservation Commission and I met with all of the candidates or all of the applicants rather and I had selected this person Carla Farente de Rufano and I'd selected her because she brought some great experience. I thought she brought a unique perspective, fresh ideas But since I made that decision and since the agenda came out, I've talked to the Chair and I heard from the Vice-Chair. And they also had a conversation with Sousa about...and there was a request for someone else to be considered, Rick Bisaccia. who has been on the commission before. He worked with the Land Conservancy, and so I wanted to bring it up for discussion that their preference would be to work with someone who can come right in and work on the initiatives that they have going on who wouldn't need any kind of time to ramp up.
So I wanted to present that as for discussion. Thank you.
I would say Rachel, do you have a recommendation having done the background on this?
Yes, I have. So really we had four excellent choices. We could not have gone wrong with any of our choices I wanted to select someone who was in the city so that they could have a quorum and that they could meet. I think Rick and Carla are both you know, in my mind They are they both bring different skills and perspectives Rick has more construction And and contracting experience So he brings that.
I will let you speak to this.
Well, Rick also has lived in Ojai 48 years versus seven years and he has background in historic restoration and renovation. He can hit the ground running and they haven't met I think for three or four months because they haven't had a quorum with two in the city. I think it was interpreted that way. So I'll make a motion to appoint Rick Bisaccia to the Historic Preservation Commission.
Is there a second?
I'll second that motion.
Okay, all in favor?
Do we need a
roll call or just aye? All in favor? Aye.
I'm going to abstain just simply because I don't have enough information, although I would defer to my fellow council person. So I'm going to say aye because I would defer to my fellow council people on this matter.
Okay
great
congratulations Rick.
May I add another comment? My understanding is there's still one more vacancy
There is one more vacancy. They will be able to meet now, so I think they would want me to pass on a thank you to approving it tonight because they'll be able to meet at their next meeting 10 days from now or so. But we will now proceed to the next appointment and as soon as we make that, we'll bring that right back to Council to fill the final spot in the HPC.
And then can I ask something about the process? Because in the past there were in-person interviews and the chair and the vice, is this on? The chair and the vice chair was present. It just so happened that Chair Akins was in Hawaii and our new council member, it's a very serious job to be on the commission. Do a lot of good work and I Just I want to know it. I was looking for is there like a process or is it over the yeah? I would like to go back to the process of where The chair is present possibly the mayor present Especially since we have new brand-new commissioners, it just feels like that's prudent
Yeah, so that was the prior process and the prior process. We changed it here and there but the gist of it was I think we had the mayor and one other council member interview all the candidates in person and often would invite the chair of the commission Make the choices and then bring them back as an agenda item, but when we moved Recently maybe a year ago. We moved over to the Style of having each council member make their appointment We didn't define at any time what rules if any there were so it's been pretty open I think that we recommended that everybody at least reach out to them And I think that that was done here But it's not a requirement. The council can make that a requirement or could decide to go back to the old process. Those are all options, but at this time, the way that we, the council adopted the process to move forward, it's not required in that process.
Okay, well I don't want to delay the process
Yeah
But I do want to recommend that at least the mayor or the chair Someone from some one other person be present. Okay? I think I think that's proof You know, I want to recommend that I can't enforce it but highly recommended Okay
in one clarification if I could The adjustment was made a little more than a year ago was about three years ago. Well two and a half three years ago time for late 2020 And it was made in stages by the then council planning commission first and then the other commissions second.
Okay, thank you. So just to close that conversation out Everybody can take that recommendation but ultimately like you said It's up to each council member how they want to do it so we can't enforce that at this point so everybody has Can follow their
process?
Okay. Thank you.
I have one other question My understanding is that the Historic Preservation Commission has been asked to do a lot of their work without any assistance from staff, and I've been told by commission members that it would be helpful if they were able to return to a seven-person commission because of the lack of staff. Is it possible to make historic preservation, a seven-person commission without impacting the rest of the commissions?
It's possible. When we made the changeover there was a thought at the time that consistently having five across all the commissions was the You know the simple way, but that was a choice. It's not mandatory We can have a seven person HPC other commissions have talked at times about wanting to make a similar request so it may be something we kind of At some point talk to each Commission about So that but that is a option we'd have to come back with the code. All the commissions are spelled out in our city code, so we'd have to come back with the code an ordinance to adjust that and then just the thing about the staff support The when the historic district project was approved to be investigated by the HPC, the motion specifically stated that no staff support would be provided with the idea being that the commission was driving it.
So that is sort of separate from a conversation of five or seven. I mean, it's not separate because I understand their argument that they need more commissioners to do it. But that was a specific part of a motion that can also be adjusted by the council or we could adjust the size of the commissions if that's the desire. I'll
try to make it quick, so a little background. We used to have seven members on each commission I was on one of those. Yes, and I don't know if I was the only descending vote. I wanted each commission to decide for themselves whether they wanted seven or five. And so we can bring that back for a future discussion.
So, can we put it somewhere on our calendar? It sounds like Susan would second that. Yes
Yeah, we could yeah We could do that and if it's from two we will put it on the list If we wanted a date certain we did support from three council members to put a date certain so at this point I just hear on the list.
You know, let's do dates certain That's not so complicated. Yeah, what's a reasonable date certain for you?
The March 14th agenda is full May the first meeting in April, you know, essentially three meetings from now. As
soon as possible. Yeah.
OK.
You know
if there's a consensus we will move forward with seven member HPC item at the first meeting in April.
And can that include a broader discussion down the road, or does it have to be commission by commission?
We could have the item be kind of across the board. We can reach out to each commission before then and find out who is happy with five and who's not, and we can come back with that report.
Okay,
thank you. All right we will move on to discussion items and just a reminder to council if you could remember to bring it through the chair when you'd like to speak just to make sure that everything's fair and everybody gets to speak All right, number two second reading and adoption of the greenhouse gas reduction code ordinance So tonight we'll get feedback from the public about approving a clean code with all the exemptions except for infeasibility Removed so do we have a staff report James?
Yes. Thank you I am sharing my screen Thank you, Mayor. So tonight on our agenda we have what we're calling the second reading and adoption of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Code Ordinance, formerly known as our REACH code. And so we said last time that we've had discussions regarding the Reach Codes for several years, and I wanted to just take a minute to sort of go back through some of that history. And then talk about some of the questions and concerns that were raised at the last meeting with staff being asked to look at a couple of issues further.
And so just to remind everybody, you know, reach code we've said it enough that it probably seems familiar but the first time people hear it. It's not common lingo. So reach code is a local building code that reaches beyond the state minimum requirements for energy use. Essentially, it's trying to make improvements. In our case for example we're requiring electrification of buildings versus allowing natural gas with the idea that the electrification results in cleaner air climate solutions and renewable energy and so that's sort of the Overall idea of a reach code in Ventura County the city of Ojai adopted the reach code we were The first City to adopt kind of the updated round of reach codes there were some cities that adopted old versions from years and years ago that have been surpassed But we adopted one and then the county followed the city and adopted a reach code.
And as we'll talk about, we adopted a reach code that had several exemptions and those exemptions are now being looked at in this revised reach code. So the city's current reach code in place requires all electric appliances in new construction buildings unless an exemption applies. And there are several exemptions, I think there's nine total listed here. Temporary buildings such as construction trailers don't have to be built all-electric attached accessory dwelling units, freestanding accessory dwelling units if it requires a panel upgrade Stationary emergency generators, deed-restricted affordable housing.
Property assessed clean energy projects. Projects that already had received final building approval before the adoption of the REACH code. New restaurants and swimming pool heaters and related equipment. Those were exempt. The ones that, we'll go through some numbers in a minute but the ones that were, the exemption that was utilized the most over that period where the accessory dwelling unit exemptions and I think just to give some background one of the reasons why the accessory dwelling units and the affordable housing exemptions were included was the idea At that time, requiring those to be built all electric may be more expensive and may discourage building those affordable units or accessory dwelling units which also count as affordable units for the city's state Rainer requirements.
And I think over time, and some of the information in the attachment to the packet shows some of the arguments that have been made that the costs have started to come down with some of those electric items. We'll talk a little bit more about that later and so that would be one thing to consider when we talk about modifying the REACH code. But so those were the nine exemptions.
And so, what we looked at over the last three years or what were the impacts of those reach codes and the fonts a little small, but I'll try to read through it under the current reach code and over the last few years, the city had one single family residence that was built Electrified per the reach code. So as one single family unit that would have been allowed to have been built with gas was not allowed to be built with gas under the reach code, we have one other single family residence pending that has filed an appeal that's being heard currently.
We've had no new commercial buildings built, but the big number is we had 109 ADUs that were built. ADUs as I mentioned a moment ago they're on the list of exemptions so those 108 and 109 were not required to be built electric. We do know some of them were built electric but it wasn't a requirement. So that's probably the biggest category that was exempt before, that would now be impacted under the new code.
We also after last week some of the questions about stationary emergency generators we did some more research on those The city has issued one permit over the last three years for a stationary emergency generator. So again, moving forward that would not be allowed under the proposed reach code unless they are able to show that it is infeasible to not build that with gas so it'd be subject to an infeasibility appeal.
So that's the kind of the history and the impact of the last REACH code. Looking forward, the new REACH code which would be called the Greenhouse Gas Reductions Code includes three main modifications well two main modifications We note in the report that the greenhouse gas reduction code As proposed does maintain the current appeal process, which is that a decision is made by the Community Development Director then appealed to the Planning Commission and then potentially could have a final appeal to the City Council. That process is currently in place and we have one appeal in process and the new Greenhouse Gas Reductions Code would maintain that process.
So I wanted to give some examples of potential impacts of this new Greenhouse Gas Reductions Code. Some very simple examples based on a lot of the questions we're hearing, would a newly built restaurant have to install or be built electric and not be able to have a gas stove? Yes, a newly built restaurant would have to do that unless they apply for and successfully show an infeasibility But a remodel of an existing restaurant would be able to maintain a gas stove.
A remodel would not be impacted, and over the last three years we had no new restaurants built. We had several remodeled restaurants. So as an example, we wouldn't see any change in that period or based on that period from the impact of the old reach code to the greenhouse gas reductions code. Outdoor fireplaces, outdoor cooking facilities, outdoor kitchens and pool heaters previously were exempt. Those are not exempt under the proposed Greenhouse Gas Reductions Code so those would need to be electric and would not be able to be gas powered.
The big one like we said earlier, any new ADU which we still expect that to be the largest number moving forward. Any new ADU would be required to be built electric and not with gas appliances. And finally because we have a couple sort of affordable housing projects that have been discussed, affordable housing projects would be required to install are to be built electric and would not be exempt under the proposed Greenhouse Gas Reductions Code.
So I won't read this kind of word by word, but we received over the last meeting in this meeting there was four or five main topics that we received concerns or comments or questions about As I mentioned, ADUs is the hot topic. I think a lot of people are still thinking about converting their either Converting part of a property into an ADU or building in ADU So we did receive and heard at the last meeting as well several questions and concerns about the impact on ADUs That's something worth considering We had a speaker last meeting who spoke about emergency generators, stationary standby generators.
We included a little information in the report on that and the very simple explanation is that there are home battery backup systems now that people are using but they have a higher upfront cost and one of the challenges is that they typically have Storage capacity where a home battery backup system might last a couple of days In an emergency if there's if it's not connected to a solar panel that can work Whereas a stationary generator can be used for much longer periods So the cost is a little higher. They don't work quite as well And so it's a legitimate concern Ultimately, the greenhouse gas reduction code as proposed would still have that infeasibility exemption if somebody can come in and show all of those impacts.
Or like we said, the council after receiving those comments last meeting asked us to research it and provide the information so the council can consider whether or not to make an adjustment for stationary standby generators. So we can answer more questions on that. Similarly, swimming pool heaters was one of the other questions we got last meeting. Very similar response. There are electric versions available. They are typically more expensive. We show in our report the price range for an electric is about $2,000 to $6,500 compared to a gas Gas pool heater, which is about a thousand to forty five hundred dollars and the gas ones Work quicker the gas ones can raise pool temperature 20 degrees And I think it's 8 to 12 hours an electric can take up to 72 hours to do the same thing.
So I So again, very similar to stationary generators where there are alternatives but they cost more and the technology isn't quite to the point where they have the same power yet or the same effectiveness yet. Additionally commercial kitchens have been a hot topic. Again we want to reiterate that as proposed and we'll actually get to some language clarification that we're going to recommend As proposed, remodeled kitchens would be allowed to continue to use gas. New construction is not allowed but that is something the council can discuss and then based on that we may need to modify the language regarding that.
And then lastly, and maybe kind of the one that wasn't necessarily on our radars before. We know and we're aware that several public agencies currently use gas or have emergency generators that use gas. When we included the infeasibility exemption, it was sort of focused at those. Some of those public agencies have state requirements for gas generators or at least certain powers of generators because in an emergency situation being able to serve the community they have to meet certain requirements And so we were aware of that and we recommended the infeasibility exemption to, so that we'd be able to have that flexibility when we need to. We have received comments from some of those groups in the last week noting that even though there is an infeasibility exemption That process does take time and it requires some, you know, some of their staff time or contractor time to then come to the city and have the appeal and make the arguments.
So we did receive some specific requests to include language that would exempt certain other agencies, state county school district, other governmental agencies and our nonprofit social service agencies And I wanted to note in this slide that, that is not unprecedented. We do have that language in other sections of the code and with the Arts Commission presentation today they're a good example. Our public art requirement where developers pay money into public art to do projects we exempt our partners like the school district, the hospital and some of the other key Partners are exempt because just logically, you know they would have to pass those costs on to the community and and So we have exempted those agencies before and it's and we've received requests now to consider exempting those agencies here in the last week or so So we wanted to make sure everybody was aware of those items.
And so for tonight, the City Council may choose whether to approve the ordinance which would change the name of the Reach Code to the Greenhouse Gas Reductions Code and eliminate all the exemptions except for infeasibility Or the City Council could identify any modifications regarding any of the concerns received or regarding any of the exemptions that were discussed, or that we had been requested to research.
And those are the council options and before I turn it back, I will ask Matt just to note the one piece of language that we need to clarify.
0:56 – 1:0648 turns
Yeah, it's Mayor and Council on section 9-1704 which is on page 2-10 or attachment A page 4. It's the Prohibition of Natural Gas Infrastructure. It's the key section that prohibits...
Wait wait where?
So section 9-1704 on page 2- 10 which is...
Attachment A?
Yes attachment A page four. The ordinance itself.
Oh the ordinance itself okay
I'll wait till everybody gets there. We're all on the same page.
I can never find it. I'm going to go to the ordinance.
It's in the ordinance, it's this fourth page of the ordinance.
Says 2-10 at the bottom.
In the center and on the bottom right it says page 4 of 8.
Okay thank you, thank
In the middle, section 9-1704. Oh I
have that circled okay.
Yeah it's the key section prohibition of natural gas infrastructure. The last sentence of that section is ambiguous and we would ask that the council clarify what the council would like to do so in this taps into the comment from Mr. Vega regarding restaurants The last sentence reads, except for remodels or additions creating new residential units comma this chapter does not apply to any remodels or additions to existing buildings issued a certificate of occupancy or equivalent final approval before January 1st 2021 and to restaurants comma as defined in section 5-13.101b the ambiguity comes in how you break the sentence up Is it, this chapter does not apply to colon one remodels and colon two restaurants which would exempt all restaurants new or remodeled.
Or does it break? This chapter does not apply to any remodels or additions to colon one existing buildings and colon two restaurants which would apply mean that new restaurants have not have natural gas, but remodel restaurants could be retained natural gas. Either is legal. We need clarity from the council as to what is the desired policy and then from there we would adjust the language to match the desired policy.
And you want that now?
I just wanted
to
Point out, and you sent an email to all of us today saying breaking down the numbers for the ADUs. And you had 61 detached which means standalone structures. You had 41 attached which means- Can we
have point of order? I thought we were discussing the section.
It's through the mayor, the discussion is the whole council.
I thought you wanted something from us to do with this? I need direct...
I'm sorry go ahead.
I'm sorry Leslie. No, I'm confused because
we weren't going to do that right now. We're gonna do that during discussion.
Oh
okay. Yeah, we need direction on this. The answer is for public comment and then address that section.
Okay.
And
so now
we'll take questions.
So it's questions and then direction on that point will come after a public comment.
Okay, I thank you. Thank you misunderstood. No, no, okay.
I could have misunderstood as well Okay, so I just wanted to be clear that when we're talking about the number of a hundred and nine adus That we're talking about 61 that are detached which means that they're standalone But we are talking about 48 that are attached that is they are not standalone So they are Basically either They're not additions. They are just simply Well, they they're not new building as I understand it. They are just simply a repurposing of existing space so I think we need to consider those are two different kinds of Structures and this is
questions time for questions
Okay, so actually you're thank you. You're actually correct I just wanted to point out that there were numbers on ad use and I wanted to make sure that That was also something that the public knew. So yeah,
so those numbers are correct 61 detached 41 attached 7 junior 80 years which are also attached so 61 and 48
Versus attached and detached.
Yeah, 61 detached and essentially 48
attached great. Thank you. Thank you for the clarification Okay on page 2 4
At the top, where it says financial consideration is not a basis for determination of physical or technical infeasibility in the proposed ordinance. And of course if you have enough money you can overcome probably any infeasibility if If you're willing to pay for it. So my understanding is that we're going to possibly after public comment, we're going to discuss how much this would cost hospitals and schools and other public agencies? Is that what I'm understanding?
Yeah, I don't have specifics but I can provide some information on the concerns that we've received from them. I think that the language about the infeasibility exemption was addressed to several of the comments that we've gotten from people who had indicated they were going to appeal under the current hardship exemption Yeah, we're essentially you know it's going to cost let's say $1,000 more and that's my hardship is that it costs more.
And so when we talked about getting rid of the hardship exemption and talking about an infeasibility exemption You know the council direction was to try to kind of reformulate that and make it a little more clear Of what like what is actually qualifying for it? We are pointing out that by going to the infeasibility exemption Coming and saying one's more expensive than the other isn't gonna be enough to get the exception anymore It would have to be they'd have to really put together an argument showing All the reasons why it's truly infeasible, not just a little bit more expensive.
Yeah yeah I understand that but yet there must be a better way to say this because in truth financial consideration is going to be involved Let's
wait So with you mentioned a hospital and then you mentioned some public agencies so with the hospital was their concern
That they were going to build Brand new buildings, and then this would apply to their brand new building?
They had a few. And I think the big one—and some people might remember this about maybe six or seven years ago—they had an issue. They have specific requirements for emergency generators. We did have sort of an issue where our code and what they needed to do because of their license and the requirements from the state didn't quite match up. And it did cost some time and some energy to try to get all those things to match up. So we were aware of that, and so one concern still is they still have that stationary generator requirement. Obviously for the most part it would be a replacement generator most likely which wouldn't be impacted by the REACH code but if they expanded down the line and they needed more generator capacity that would be an issue.
And then even just, they talked a little bit about their current building's heating system. And now if they build any other building having to have a completely different heating system and just different equipment and everything else. So they had a few different concerns. We reiterated that remodels don't require this process, and then if they're building a new building I think the hospital is probably one that would be able to come in and show a hardship or I'm sorry an infeasibility pretty easily but it is To their point. It's just you know, it's another step in their process that they're gonna have to Spend some extra time and energy on so You know I Understood that point I wanted to I told them that I would pass that on to the
so if I understand If they have to comply with some mandatory regulation and then that would fit within the infeasible definition because...
I would expect it to. We had thought of that when we developed the ordinance, is that was literally one of those three or four situations where we thought they're going to come in and they're going to have to meet these Stationary generator requirements and we need to have that flexibility for them to do that. So it's developed that way obviously when when an infeasibility actually comes in We're gonna have to consider it based on the circumstances at that time, but I would expect it to meet that that exemption
1:07 – 1:1418 turns
Would it make sense to do a provision that said that if the new construction is subject to mandatory conditions, that those shall be taken into consideration when the feasibility determination is made.
That could be something, maybe it's clarifying some of the language in the infeasibility exemption. So while everybody is talking we can put some thought into how we can suggest
that. I have a clarifying question on that. Thank you. The hospital's point is that it would be a cumbersome regulation for them. It would be cumbersome for them to come in and apply for feasibility, is that correct?
Yes,
that is so it would be expensive I mean even though you know That's kind of what they do. They're going to have to add this into their process and that will eventually get passed on to Be it students in schools or patients in hospitals Etc etc. So that was kind of their concern as well as the infeasibility
Yeah, we explained how the infeasibility process would work and that I think it would actually... Any situation that we discussed, I felt that could apply. But the process itself is part of their concern.
Thank you. Okay, we will move on to public comment now. First, we have Gautam Barua then Bill Miley and then Colin Jones.
Mayor Council, thank you for letting me speak. So exciting to see the revisions to the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Act. I think it's exciting to think about the benefits here that are climate based as I mentioned in the last meeting. The impact, the greenhouse impact of natural gas on a life cycle basis is equal to coal which is the worst Source of power generation available.
old infrastructure, and lastly public health concerns. So people working spending their time whether in enclosed spaces like ADUs or in kitchens of restaurants being exposed to pollutants. I think one thing that in this evening's discussion that warrants being called out is this question of upfront costs and the question of feasibility and financing for non-profits community organizations So I think there are a couple of things. One is that with a lot of technologies that look for cleaner solutions, electric cars is a great example of this.
You often face higher upfront costs but the lifetime costs of whatever you're using are significantly lower right? So electric cars as an example they have a lifetime of up to half a million or more miles and so you might pay more in the beginning but your cost of I'm where there are opportunities for both for-profit and non-profit entities to take advantage of financing. And I would assert that it's actually, it could be better for organizations like the hospital to look and avail themselves of those financing options because they're not only getting better economics over time but they're actually going to improve their ability to service their debt overall. So I encourage the council to stay really tight with these exemptions and on the restaurant exemption, to make sure that the restaurants are not exempted from new restaurants and from significant retrofits.
Thank you.
Thank
You Gautam. I don't know you what is your name again?
Gautam Barua.
And where do you work somewhere in Ojai?
Yes, I have a business that's based in Ojai. I've lived in Ojai full-time for three years and I've been involved with the community for about 13
years. You just seem very knowledgeable so thank you very much.
Yeah, thank you.
Thank you Gautam. Next we have Bill Miley then Colin Jones then Michelle Ellison
Good evening I believe more key information is needed before a second vote. And the example, first example was the Ojai Hospital and Mr. Vega just answered that. But how about our hotels and motels? I understand battery backup is not large enough to last more than a day or two for a large institution like the Ojai Hospital. If weather and earthquake events occur in the future, and we have severed electrical supplies, our businesses could be in jeopardy of failure to function.
There's another industry in town that uses lots of natural gas, laundromats which we have two of and many people use them. My family owned the Miramonte laundromat from 1978 through 1997 and ran it. And we know that it uses lots of natural gas, and is sufficient from the standpoint of water heating and dryer heating. Future expansions, natural gas if we prohibit natural gas it may be very costly for laundromats to provide electric water heating. Also it takes a long time to heat versus natural gas.
Most laundromats of medium and large size use natural gas I also would like to suggest that many of the people who use laundromats are the people that this council is trying to protect. And if it costs more to run it with full electricity, the prices are going to go up. So I suggest before taking a second vote Your council find out what the cost will be involved for future electrification of a hospital, motels, hotels and laundromats.
Thanks. Thank you Bill. Next we have Colin Jones then Michelle Ellison and then Carol Smith.
1:14 – 1:237 turns
Council members thank you for letting me speak I've spoken many times regarding the Reach Code. It appears I'm going to lose this battle. The Council has spent three years and countless hours so far making absolutely no difference. There's been maybe one building affected. Your only success has been in removing the freedom of choice from the people you represent, What worries me is what's next, because you won't be able to stop yourselves. Next on the agenda my guess is how we're going to retrofit the whole of Ojai to electric.
A word of warning and a few inconvenient truths. New appliances are made of steel. Steel is generally made from heating iron ore with coal. For every tonne of steel produced 2.3 tonnes of carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere That doesn't even account for the carbon produced in the mining itself. Add to that, that every new electrical appliance manufactured produces an average of 350 kilograms of carbon dioxide. It's approximately 3,000 homes in Ojai. If you replace two appliances in each home at 7,000 kilograms times 3000 homes as 2100 tons of CO2 into the atmosphere and that doesn't take into account the transportation or delivery of new appliances or the removal and destruction Of the older plants, 48% of our electric in California on the grid comes from burning natural gas.
So what difference are you making? If the power goes off and you can't cook, you can't boil water and so you say get a generator. I looked into one for my house To keep the lights on, to keep my refrigerator working and not much else, $15,000. You really want to put that burden on your voters? During the Thomas fire we stayed at our house. We were without electric for seven days.
We had gas, we had lanterns, we were able to cook our meals, boil water for coffee, clean ourselves I used a gasoline pump to pump out my pool into fire hoses and we saved our home. What happens in the next Thomas Fire, when the power goes down? And stays down? You can call the REACH code by any name you want. The Greenhouse Gas Reduction Code. You can use all the science-based language to convince us.
You could put lipstick on a pig. Still a pig.
Thank you, Colin. Next we have Michelle Ellison then Carol Smith and then Jeff Schneider.
Good evening I'm Michelle Ellison a resident of Ojai and served on the city's climate committee. I am just so grateful that there is unanimous support by this council to get off fossil fuels and protect the life on this planet that we share from the devastating effects of climate change. This updated ordinance is meaningful and will have a greater impact on reducing emissions than the previously adopted version which had various carve-outs.
This is an opportunity to do better moving forward, and Ojai's leadership will have an exponential effect on reducing emissions elsewhere by serving as a model. To recap, as we've discussed various times, the key benefits of all electric new buildings are they reduce emissions They cost less to build and operate, making them more affordable than buildings with gas infrastructure and equipment. And they improve air quality. Pollutants from gas stoves are particularly hazardous.
While the focus of this ordinance is on new buildings, the majority of our emissions are coming from gas use in existing buildings and vehicles. So we've got more important work ahead of us as a community. Let's get this done and move on. When we switch from gas to electric, we have access to clean renewable energy. More and more residents are installing rooftop solar and battery storage which is great. As of 2020 newly built homes in California are required to have solar.
We also benefit from Clean Power Alliance, and I've served as an alternate director for OHAI on that board. That's the community choice energy agency serving 3 million people across 33 municipalities here in Ventura County and L.A. County including OHAI. CPA procures our energy and Edison delivers it because so many residents and businesses have enrolled in 100% renewable including most of us here in OHAI, CPA has become the largest provider of renewables in the country To date, CPA has procured 1,883 megawatts of renewable energy and 1,089 megawatts of storage which has reduced more than 2.6 million tons of greenhouse gas emissions.
CPI is the third largest purchaser of battery storage in the state, helping to ensure reliability when the sun isn't shining and the wind isn't blowing. Which I know is a concern that we've been hearing about reliability. We're also benefiting from competitive rates and low-income residents are getting the 100% renewable energy at no extra cost, an important provision for those most financially vulnerable.
It's also worth noting the big spike we're seeing in natural gas prices. This winter, we've seen gas prices triple and I know that came as a shock for a lot of people with very high gas bills and we can expect to see more volatility in fossil fuel prices going forward. California has ambitious goals to achieve carbon neutrality and the federal government is investing billions of dollars in electrification so this step we're taking here in Ojai is in line with the direction we're headed anyway.
To wrap up, we have a moral responsibility to future generations and to those most impacted by the devastating effects of climate change which disproportionately is people of color in disadvantaged communities. So rather than looking for excuses to continue polluting, we should be working together to create a more equitable and life-sustaining future that benefits all. Thank you.
Thank you Michelle. Next we have Carol Smith then Jeff Schneider and then Lise Martin Crawford. Yes,
good evening all. I am Carol Smith. I live at 23 Tower Mina Lane in the city of Ojai. I'm totally astounded how you do not ask for people's addresses. I am your constituent. Everyone can speak. This lady spoke very nicely but I don't know if she lives in this city or the county. Maybe she lives in the county and we can tell her well you need to address, you'd be better off going over here. We have no control over the county Maybe some of these speakers are in Kalamazoo. Why are you not asking for addresses?
Don't you want to know who your actual constituents are? I can't believe you don't do that, we always did that. So number two, number one on this topic is we had no lights in Taormina for 18 hours the other day. We had an electric out and I have all solar I'm happy to say but I do not have a backup battery because we're saving up to get it. It's like $15,000 and But I do have a gas stove So I was able to heat water. I was able to make a meal I think that This code though, has wonderful ideas about it. It's not ready for adaption. We have to look more into moving people all to solar. I just think it is premature to do that and will have unintended consequences in a hospital. I'm a professor of nursing.
The electricity goes out, it has to come back on in a millisecond. There is no way that From what I heard, the electric generator is as fast as a gas. I'm not sure but it would be very complicated to make sure in our nursing homes where people we have some who actually are ventilator dependent that this is feasible for them to do. We hardly build any housing in Ojai And so again, I think this needs to be worked on. It should not be adapted tonight.
There are too many issues that I'm really, really concerned with and the source of electricity. How do we know that the electric that's coming to this all-electric house is not coming from a very polluted source? I don't know where Edison got it from necessarily So that's another issue, as you can see. It may be that it's good for us but we're actually the Edison Company or wherever is actually taking it from a very polluting source so thank you very much.
Thank You Carol next Jeff Schneider then Lise Martin and then I have one with no name if anybody oh Ruth okay great thanks
Council citizens, let me read you some.
1:23 – 1:2915 turns
Council, would you like consensus for
that? In the past it's true that we were asked to state our name and address. But the truth is that giving the address was optional because there were some people that just didn't want the public to know where they lived. So it's not mandatory but if people want to, it is nice to know so we have a sense of who lives in our district and that sort of thing.
And if I could jump in briefly, Mayor Pro Tem Francini is correct. The city cannot require neither a name nor an address. There is a First Amendment right to speak anonymously and do not reveal or to use your name but not reveal your address. We can ask we can't require.
Is there a council consensus to ask speakers to say whether they live in town?
Can we adopt a statement That tells the people speaking that their thoughts are going to be considered differently if they're advise us that they are a resident of the city.
No, I oppose that. Well each one of us can consider that on our own. My own thinking is that it depends on the issue of course but on this issue I wouldn't give any more weight to a person whether they lived in or out of my district or the city limit there are times when that would have merit I think it's just, on the planning commission agenda, I believe it still asks people. I think we could simply state that as a courtesy, state your name and address for the record with the understanding that it's optional.
** Yeah, we can simply state that. We can also put it on the cards and say optional moving forward. ** Yeah.
Keep it simple. ** This is why we need discussion about public comments in general next week. This is why we need that. ** Okay.
Well let's...shall we
wait
until then? And we can talk about it together? ** Sure. But from here on people want
to they can.
** Of course. Okay. Thank you for your patience Jeff.
Well, I live on El Paseo which is entirely in the city. I'd like to read some well-documented data points that should fill us all with optimism about our world and our future. Since 1960 the world's population has doubled from 4 billion to its current 8. Surely there must be famines galore but no there are not In fact, through innovations we are growing more and using less land doing it.
In North America and Northern Europe forests have increased 35%. During the last 60 years the planet has greened almost 40%, mostly in areas that were deserts. Since 1950 life expectancy has increased 50%. Over 20 children out of 1,000 did not live to see their fifth birthday. Now only 2.7 suffer that fate, a reduction of 87%. Since 1950 the average per capita income has risen an astounding 359%. Since 1961 the average caloric intake has increased 31%, Schooling for children has increased 200%. The number of people living in democratic societies has risen over 35%.
Biodiversity numbers are showing terrific improvement. We hear very little information like this. It's out there, but you really have to look for it because you're certainly not going to find it or hear it on the corporate media today. What we hear is a great ashamedness that people are dying. There's a lot of discrepancy out there to sort through. Is CO2 really causing the major problems we hear?
If it is how could my data be accurate? Let's look at two plans going forward one way Stays the path, basically making minor adjustments like we have been doing for hundreds of years using ingenuity free markets and technology to navigate our way in and make improvements. This way wants you to keep and utilize your God given agency to find better ways forward.
The other side presents a scenario of dire emergency, necessitating that the government play a larger and larger role. Pay attention because larger government means that you the citizen will play a smaller role and give up your freedoms in the process. It also means there'll be more corruption Lots of it, worse than what is alleged within the city government now. Thank you.
Thank you Jeff. Next we have Lise Martin Crawford and then Ruth Cooper
1:29 – 1:377 turns
Hi, my name is Deborah Lise-Martin Crawford and I do go mostly by Lise Martin. I live in Village McStew's on Signal Street at the corner of Oak and I've been there since 2001 and I've been an Ojai resident since 1995. I'm here to speak tonight against this particular reach code and the exemptions being No longer available. I think that the exemptions are important to consider On a case-by-case basis for you all to go into more detail, but the one the ones that strike me the most Have to do with 80 use because forthgoing it would be really good for public housing for there to be more adus and And I for one would love to do that and haven't had the means to do that yet. So, I know that the argument is that on the front end by going all electric you spend more perhaps upfront and you gain more long term but right now having the income to do such things is not a small matter for many of us.
The other thing I would like to say I really am appalled at narrowing our options, especially in emergency situations. And I do feel like the hospitals and the burdens that we're talking about that are requiring a special a special feasibility clause that should apply to residents as well. And I'm not saying that it won't, but it's sort of like a bigger hoop for an individual. But if it's gonna cost hospitals and state organizations or public ones more money, it's certainly costing the individuals more.
And I really think that we're premature in doing this. I believe that those of us who went through the Thomas Fire here and were so grateful to have some gas on board for when electricity was not available, that was a huge lesson. And I also agree that we need to think about the intention or not the letter of the law but the spirit of the law. What are we really trying to create as we go forward? How are we really serving this community long term? And I do feel like that this is problematic still. So, I would encourage you to consider taking longer.
Thank you.
Thank you. My name is Ruth Cooper and I live on Sunset Place in the city, and I want to thank you all for your leadership on this issue and remind us all that our council members are not simply Representing our interests, we elected them to offer leadership and leadership is necessary when we have to do things that are hard. And one of the things that we have to do that is very hard is address Climate change, the science is very clear on this.
And we're being told that we really need a World War II style response where everyone joins together to solve this very difficult problem. I don't think we should be so angry at our council members or at our neighbors about this I think the people that we should be most angry with are the oil and gas executives that ran a disinformation campaign for over 30 years now, and are still doing that and putting out information that some of you may also have read.
They knew that climate change was a problem and they purposely tried to create confusion in the minds of regular people and representatives at every level of government. This is not a conspiracy theory, this is history which you can read in all sorts of reliable sources So if you want to get angry, get angry at the oil and gas industry and their disinformation campaign that was because of their own greed and fear of things changing for their industry.
They're the ones who have made it so that we all have to adapt Much more quickly than we would like and it is inconvenient, but the fault lies not with our City Council or our state government or our federal government. The fault lies with the people who over the last 30 plus years have tried to stop the process and now we have to go much faster than we would like. Thank you.
Thank You Ruth Weston any comments on zoom?
Yes, Mayor. First we'll have Larry Steingold followed by Bob Kemper and Renee. Larry you have the floor?
Thank you very much Larry Steingold taxpayer citizen an occupant of Ojai and it's now home I'd like to congratulate my City Council person Rachel Lang for telling us that you're not coming for our existing gas appliances in our homes and restaurants I assume that also means replacement if they break. So, I'd like to see her and the other city council people and the mayor codify the fact that you're not coming for our existing gas appliances, my HVAC, my hot water tank, my gas stove or anything else that I have in my present home. I'd also like to see you codify propane Because that's a gas and that may fall under what somebody may think is a greenhouse gas, which it whatever. But the point is codify if you're not coming for it, codify it. If you are coming for it tell us now because obviously Miss Ellison thinks that you should come and get it.
Okay, so codify that you're not coming for it. Rachel please do that because that's what you said. You're not coming to take our existing gas appliances. The infrastructure, the technical, the cost for all electric is not there yet. Why not just give people 15-20 years to get rid of all the gas and in 2040 just like the trolley that's now electrifying and UCLA study I believe it was that mentioned in 2045 and just shut off the gas line then?
Because right now, we've been told to unplug your electric car or unplug your air conditioner. The system isn't strong enough. So now we may have that problem but that's part of it. But more importantly I'd like you to see you codify what you're not going to do. You're not going to come for our present gas appliances and our present propane because otherwise people standing outside right now, I assume they are maybe freezing. I don't know what the temperature is there cause I'm in Florida So thank you very much and have a nice evening.
Thank you, Larry. Next we have Bob Kemper. Bob, do you have the floor?
1:37 – 1:4515 turns
There we go. Yes, thank you. Bob Kemper here. I'll speak briefly on the REACH codes. My professional experience is with gas and electric utilities. I spent 30 years on the Northeast seven states installing energy efficient equipment in businesses and residences, hundreds and hundreds of thousands of residences. So I come to this topic with some experience Um, I'm in favor of strong building codes and standards. We actually ran the energy start new construction program for many years in the Northeast.
So I'm a real fan of that what I think is happening here with these reach codes is consistent with the other. I want to start by saying that one of the topics coming before the City Council is a rush to get something passed. We have very little new construction activity that was covered in This will also impact the cost of affordable housing. We have talked on nauseam about the need for a housing task force or committee, the purpose of that would be to evaluate such issues as this.
As the rent stabilization issue, as would be homelessness, as would be affordable housing. All of those topics fall underneath the category of a Housing Task Force. Why in the heck are we not establishing this in advance of making these decisions? Are we going to establish this housing task force to evaluate what we did wrong after the fact, or do we want to get public and stakeholder input before we make these decisions?
Please wait. Don't rush. There's no hurry. Thank you.
Thank
you, Bob. Next, we have Renee followed by Erika Helson and Stephen Colomay. Renee, you have the floor.
Okay, I'm trying to figure out how to get on there. You're here.
We can hear you.
Oh, I'm here? Okay, sorry. I thought I had to click on something. Am I still there?
Yes.
Okay. Thank you very much.
I want to say at the very beginning words are vessels of meaning and the beginning of wisdom is to call things by their real name And in my opinion, being able to understand the ability to call things by their right name when we live in these economic times and these climate emergency times. And what does all this mean? I think people have a really hard time understanding what is climate change? What are greenhouse gases? How do we really, you know Deal with the ozone layer and so the most important part I think is to be able to call this what it really is. This is not a greenhouse gas code, this is a reach code and it has to do with electricity And so much time has already been spent, enormous amounts of time. And it to me is just so sad to see our city manager becoming an expert on this type of energy and this type of gas and how much propane and how much...
He's a city manager! He's got departments to manage and people to manage and money to manage. And to me, this is really sad to see That we are turning this into an issue that is a political issue, and we're politicizing this as something that we the people can't understand and be able to figure out. We know we're in a climate emergency. We know that we have to reduce our greenhouse gases We know we're all going to have to electrify at some point. I agree with all that, I think this is really important but I don't agree with the waste of time that the city is doing this as council members. I do agree that we need to have a climate action plan there are many people and many cities who know how to do a climate action plan The county of Ventura has a climate action plan.
The city of Santa Barbara has a climate action plan. When we're talking about greenhouse gases, we're talking about something related to climate. We're not talking about greenhouse gases related to electricity. It's a different concept. So I'd really like to have you table this, discuss it for what it really is and refer it to a committee who can address the issue. Thank
you. Next we have Erika Helson. Go ahead, Erika.
Hi can you hear me okay?
Yes.
All right my name is Erika Helson I live on East Topatopa Street next to the Fox Street Car Wash so i grew up in Ojai and I credit our beautiful town for cultivating in me a really deep appreciation for our environment and this led me to do things like start an ecology club when I was a student at Villanova and then earn a master's degree in environmental science and policy.
I've worked in sustainability for over 10 years with positions in the public, private and nonprofit sectors. I'm speaking as a private citizen but this is the background from which I speak on this topic. So to solve climate change we know we have to reduce our emissions. The largest sources of greenhouse gas emissions in California are buildings, transportation industry and agriculture Here at the city level, buildings are one area where we can actually lower our emissions.
And climate policy experts across the country and around the world are unified behind electrification because it's a viable solution. And that's why over 70 cities in California have already passed all electric reach codes like ours. If we keep burning fossil fuels, we can't bring our climate back into balance but the good news is We do have electric technologies, the ones that we need today to power our lives.
And I know this because I live in an all-electric home. The great thing about all electric buildings is that we get to maintain our quality of life, all our modern comforts while also protecting our planet. So I felt very frustrated for years as a climate activist because The climate crisis is totally overwhelming. It just felt like there are no solutions for us, but in recent years it's felt really hopeful to see electrification come through as a solution. It's reasoned to be hopeful.
There are great resources in place like the tax credits from the Inflation Reduction Act Local incentives from the county and 3C Wren, more money coming from the state to make this more affordable than ever. And I think it was the last speaker's comment about putting in place a climate action plan. I'm totally for that. I think that's great and I think if you look at other climate action plans across other cities one of the first things you'll see is passing an all electric reach code So I think we're ahead of schedule, and it's great to see the city council taking leadership on this issue today. Thank you.
Thank you, Erica.
Our last raised hand on Zoom, we have Stephen Colamea.
1:46 – 2:008 turns
Hello, this is Steve Colomay. Two weeks ago I focused on myth busting and tonight I will fact check misinformation and disinformation that was expressed tonight and in rumor and social media chatter over the last couple of weeks. It's important to note that we are not litigating tonight whether or not to adopt a reach code. We have an existing reach code that was adopted by a prior council before the current mayor was in office.
On the agenda tonight is curing deficiencies that became apparent since the passage of the municipal code It's important to note, and there was a lot of confusion expressed about whether this applies to existing buildings. The code that is going to be voted on tonight applies only to new buildings and not to remodels of existing restaurants homes or commercial buildings.
All objective studies, many submitted to the record of this ordinance through a couple of years demonstrate that by avoiding the cost of natural gas infrastructure. The fixed costs for building all electric are similar to or less than the building of mixed fuels and there really have been no objective studies that counter that. Financial incentives with the Inflation Reduction Act are going to further sweeten the deal for those taking advantage of going all electric.
In the long run, natural gas prices are going to continue to be highly volatile and inflate at a rate higher than electricity, especially as electricity is increasingly produced using green technologies. I will also point out that the electricity supplied to Ojai by the Clean Power Alliance, which is our 100% clean energy by default, is the greenest green without even reliance on hydropower or nuclear.
CPA's clean energy as has been predicted is currently less expensive than the dirtiest, meaning the most polluting of Southern California Edison's energy options. And that's due to the fact that SCE is relying upon natural gas in power plants. Stephanie Princettel's name has been invoked in these discussions from UCLA, and she and her team are highly supportive of going electric. So that's been very much misinterpreted. I think the infeasibility exemption is going to solve most if not all of the concerns that have been raised today so i would encourage you strongly to give Exemption-free reach code, a real serious try here. Thank you.
Thank you Steve. Is that it Weston?
Yes mayor no more raised hands.
Okay thank you we will move on to discussion I'm going to make suggestion to council we take a three minute break come back take public comment for half an hour and then move on to discussion does that seem good plan yes okay all right we will be right back Okay okay we are back could you please take your seats. And it's eight o'clock we have a currently present we have thirteen public comments so my suggestion to council is that we drop it at two minutes and Feel about that because we also have. About twenty online so if we have more than twenty five comments we drop to two minutes so we clearly have more than twenty five so I'm suggesting that we take all the ones who are present right now.
Okay, so we have 13 public comments right now. So if we drop that... Yes? Present.
Can I ask Weston, there's 20 people in the room but Weston can you ask them to put their hands up and tell us how many are indicating they want to speak in public comment?
Yes for all participants via Zoom if you could use the raise hand feature now so we can gauge how many public comments we will have. Currently we have one raised hand.
I think it'll be more than that right now.
My suggestion is we do two minutes, take all of these right now.
2:00 – 2:0725 turns
Yeah? Microphone
please. Right.
Maybe you should say that.
Okay, yes and if you just agree with someone who spoke just to save time if you can say I agree with so-and-so and then we can move a little faster? Yeah. Okay okay
so we will start do we need to take a vote on that point of order on to limit the time to two minutes?
Consensus works consensus meaning unanimity if all five agree then there's no need for formal vote if there is not all five in agreement then we need a formal vote
I am not in agreement.
All right, then we would need a vote. Can
we have one more discussion?
Well all in favor of dropping the two minutes and taking all these... Is there point of order
is their discussion available for this or is this just as simple because Councilmember Pro Tem Francina would like to make a comment.
Discussion is available on any motion unless the majority seeks to end the matter by calling the question. And discussion that is,
okay?
I just want to say as mayor if there's a speaker that merits extra time on a topic we've never heard and it's earth-shaking and timely, I will hope that you would use your discretion and your power to give them an extra minute You can also make that request and we can vote on it. So you can actually make that request just as an FYI. All
in favor of dropping to two minutes?
Yes.
Does that mean everybody will get to speak before, they don't have to wait for the end of the meeting? Correct. That's the reason for it otherwise if we don't do it there'll be some that have to wait till even 1130. We'll see how it goes. For that reason. Hence
the problem
Okay, all right. So Weston if you could please drop it to two minutes? We'll begin with Peggy Lacerra then Joan Kemper already spoke. Bob Kemper and Cindy Jones.
Peggy's gone.
Okay, Peggy is gone. Is Bob Kemper here? No, okay, Cindy Jones. Cindy Jones then Colin Jones and then Clay Creasy. Not too sweet but it's short.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight, and thanks for the lovely gas-fueled heaters outside. So I'm a resident of the Valley for 25 years, and I realize that what goes on in the city and City Council meetings affects us that live in the county areas. So that's why I'm here. Recently a letter was posted in the Ojai Valley News titled, you don't know what you got until it's gone.
Where the author tries to compare us to towns and cities likely much larger than Ojai, where residents are limited to one minute of public comment and have to combine individual comments together. I can assure you that Ojai residents know what we've got. We don't need the insidious litigious minds of Simply Ojai and their followers to tell us how good we've got it.
We don't compare our town to any place else We don't need to, because we recognize without comparison what we have. We love Ojai. That's exactly why we're coming out to protect what we've got. Ojai is a lifestyle. Some came here to live it, and some just don't get it. They came here to change and control it. Well, Ojai has a strong spirit that will transcend the we-know-better-than-you virtue signaling fear based ideologues.
In the end, the strong energy force that is Ojai will always prevail even if Mayor Sticks does not resign on her own. Thank
you, Cindy next we have Collin Jones and then clay crazy and then Sabrina Tipton
I live in the county, I live in the East End. Speaking up for justice is a thing that you do no matter where you live. I've lived in Ojai for 25 years and I remember some challenging and contentious times here. The discussions for the skate park or the time when Ojai was almost bankrupt when we couldn't pay the police and we couldn't pay the fire department Back then, there was a small-town innocence in these meetings. It was the reflection of Johnny Carson's skits on the Ojai police blotter.
Even if I disagreed with some of the decisions, I always felt that the council members were doing what they thought best for Ojai. That was before the tourists, the divisiveness and before the lawsuits. There've been many threats to the stability of Ojai. For example, the freeway that was planned to go through the valley, the Weldon Canyon dump, the gravel trucks and Golden State Water.
Citizens groups of Ojai organized and confronted these threats. Joan if she was here would tell you about that. Voters uncowed and afraid take on these powerful entities. This mayor is what you're seeing today These are the citizens, the ones you don't want to hear from. Today we recognize that the threat comes from within, from our own elected officials and from an agenda considered to be more important than truth and transparency.
You apparently won the election by a slim margin Mayor. I think that margins eroded. Thank you.
Thank you Colin. Next Clay Creasy then Sabrina Tipton and then Karen Snyder
2:07 – 2:136 turns
Thank you, Mayor and City Council. I'm Clay Creasy. I live in Ojai in Sousa's district. Two minutes is not a lot of time so I'll go quick. I had originally wanted to talk at some length about an alternative way to achieve affordable housing via a potential increase in the transit occupancy tax and channel those funds to affordable housing or to actual grants to very low-income renters. I will point out that cities like Sonoma and St. Helena have done that, and it's a good plan that we could follow.
I do want to though transition to another topic And that is the continued lack of transparency here. Two weeks ago, I asked Mayor Sticks and Councilman Whitman and City Attorney Summers to recant the positions they had taken or things they had done which I felt were not appropriate. None of that recantation or apology has happened so now I'm unfortunately forced to conclude that you're not gonna go in that direction.
I will point out that the Mayor of Anaheim had to resign last year for, in the face of an investigation among other things. The Attorney General complaint said that the mayor covertly with intent of concealing from negotiating team and the public passed privilege and confidential information to the party that was negotiating with the city. So lest we think that passing confidential information is, oh well you know that's done we can move on it's hardly that. We need a clean slate here I'm very happy with a number of the folks on the council but there are some that still need to do the apology and and move on so that's my message to you tonight thank you
Thank you, Clay. Next, Sabrina Tipton and Karen Snyder and then Lee Heintz. Is Sabrina here? Nope. Karen Snyder?
Thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight. My name is Karen Snyder, and I'm speaking on behalf of a citizen of OI who couldn't be here tonight. As I'm reading this it's him that's saying it although I agree with a lot of what's in here. I have become aware of some of the issues surrounding the City Council via information published in The Ojai Valley News, watching city council meetings on my computer and having received emails containing what I concluded are factual information and documents. My general reaction to what I have absorbed is what in the heck is going on here?
I was shocked to see the exchange in the late January meeting between the City Attorney and Leslie and Betsy. Not only was I shocked, I was thoroughly embarrassed. This type of behavior has no place in city council meetings or any other public meetings. The rudeness displayed by the City Attorney is simply unacceptable and it seemed like there was a concerted effort to gang up on Leslie.
Excuse me for a moment while I bring this up on my phone. These events could be described as series of poor judgments, but it could also be described as a purposeful attempt by Betsy to control and deceive. I'm concluding that it is the latter. Therefore, I am calling upon Betsy to promptly turn in her resignation as the mayor of our beloved Ojai including her position on this city council. I will also be urging All of the officers, all of the citizens of Ojai that I know to call for this same action. Thank you for your attention.
Thank you Karen. Next we have Lee Hindman then Jeff Snyder and then Lise Martin.
I'm Leigh Hendman and I've lived in Ojai since 2006. We bought property right outside the city limits in 99. My concern here tonight is about Mayor Stick's alignment with Simply Ojai. She appears to be joined with this group that has filed a lawsuit against the city. My concern is not about the group, it's about the mayor's ties to the group and the influence that she might have regarding this lawsuit.
It appears to me, but please prove me wrong if you can, that actions behind closed doors and a lack of transparency regarding this issue presents a conflict of interest. I and others are troubled and Betsy by your relationship with Simply Ojai I've heard you claim that you have no special interest or influence with this group, but there is background information that is pointing otherwise.
So I'd just like for the council to investigate this relationship thoroughly. It's reasonable. You can't, in all honesty, perform your duties as mayor if you hold a strong affinity and loyalty to an outside group whose interests might clash with the city's interests. Betsy I have no ill will to you. Our kids went to school together, your son with my daughter. They learned the values of honesty, integrity Let's act on that. And when you opened up today asking for peace and unity and civility, I ask for that too. Your behavior I've seen in city council meetings upsets me because I don't see you acting that out.
Next we have Jeff Snyder then Lise Martin and then Dr. Hess.
2:13 – 2:196 turns
So I'd like to say that. What I don't understand is why there isn't more public comments encouraged rather than avoiding them. It seems like there should be, since all the allegations and propriety that you all should be interested in integrity and transparency and making more time for public comment. Thank you.
Thank you, Jeff. Lise Martin and then Dr. Hess and then Robin Gerber.
Thank you. My name is Lise Martin. As I've mentioned, I live in Village Mixed Juice downtown Ojai. Tonight I wanted to come and speak on the topic of service. The last time I spoke in general comments, I spoke about kindness Tonight I want to speak about service because I believe that we have an extraordinary community here, and I want to encourage everyone to be of service in their unique ways. And I wanted to say that my private practice which is touch of light was only a part-time one and I part time worked retail all these years and I've been privileged to do so.
Most recently, I've been working at Rainbow Bridge as a cashier and now in vitamins. And it was at the loss of having my private practice in fine art healing arts and yoga wane over the pandemic and what happened after but I've gained so much from that experience of being of service And I wanted to just acknowledge that even if it's part time, even if you're like me and you're 65 and your retirement age going back into the workforce is one of the most beautiful things we can offer one another with all that life experience.
And as an aside, I've spoken in the past also of being kind of like a canary in a coal mine. I came here on a healing arts journey for myself. I didn't know I needed healing and so I wanted to mention that and be very vulnerable and authentic that one of my issues is that I was allergic to my childhood vaccines. I've been unable to take vaccines since And I wanted to say that people may not be aware of an organization called the FLCCC Alliance. It's the Frontline Critical COVID Care Alliance.
It's an organization that has information for people who have long-term COVID and other things, so I just wanted you to have a resource in the community for that.
Good night. Thank you, Lise. Next Dr. Hess then Robin Gerber.
Good evening. My name is Dr. Hess and I've been here lived here since 1998 It seems to me that our community is not surprisingly mirroring the issues of corruption now plaguing our country at large I was absolutely appalled at the last City Council meeting which was my first ever meeting it appeared to me that the mayor, council members Whitman and Lange succeeded in impeding public comment on their corruption and shenanigans by putting public comments at the end of the agenda, effectively stifling the elderly, those with children and the disabled of their First Amendment rights. In this country freedom was envisioned by our founders from the bottom up not from the top down and the First Amendment was first for the very reason that there can be no real discussion of any issue or agenda items or true freedom if the voice of the people is stifled and the corruption of the City Council is left unaddressed.
Shame on you, Betsy Sticks, Andrew Whitman and Rachel Lange! I call on all three of you to resign. After carefully reading a recent Forbes magazine article, I'm inclined to believe that this whole city council with the exception of Leslie has been bought off by the corrupt non-profit Simply Ojai. In effect what I see happening in our little Ojai is a microcosm of what is happening in the country as a whole. There has been a tyrannical muzzling of the people, medical tyranny with forced vaccination of our children if they wish to be educated, a dumbing down of our education system in which the classroom size is so large 35-40 students that incredible teachers cannot possibly teach and bright students cannot learn as well as a takeover of our individual freedoms, such that power is becoming centralized by unelected bodies like the UN or three-letter agencies.
Or in the case of this mayor, seemingly elected just so in order to more effectively shut us up and off. If all our energy is electric it becomes as easy as shutting off a switch to shut the people up and off. Climate change is a hoax.
Thank you Dr. Hess. Robin Gerber?
2:19 – 2:2415 turns
I'm not sure I can follow that. Robin Gerber, I'm Taormina Lane, I am Sousa's constituent. Congratulations on recognizing that there is council protocols particularly Rachel and Susan. What happened two meetings ago was that there was a unilateral placement of public comment completely in contravention of the council protocols by the city manager and the mayor, I assume under the authority of the section that's called agenda development.
And I've heard a lot of people say oh well the mayor can put anything she wants on the agenda and can order the agenda. Of course it says the city manager does that In collaboration with the mayor and that is development of the agenda items, which is wholly separate. As Sousa pointed out from the section called agenda content. I know I sent this to you all but I just want to reinforce it.
The rules will set everyone free and make everyone a lot more happy And I would encourage the city manager, please James let's not have this happen again. I know you're busy and I know it's hard to go back and really study and read the protocols took me a while to figure it out. Same thing for you Mr. Summers could you please? I know you're not formally the parliamentarian might be a good idea to have one particularly when we have a chair who doesn't understand Robertson's rules very well yet Mr. Summers, you can step in and you should be stepping in more. Please talk to other attorneys for cities and I think you will find that in open and in closed sessions, you have a more active role to play as you should've played in the closed session where items were discussed that were not confidential.
Thank you.
Thank you Robin. Weston any comments online?
Yes, first we have Bob Kemper followed by Tina Brumond and Jacqueline Francis. Bob you have the floor?
Thank you. I didn't actually think I was going to get on so quickly. I appreciate the opportunity. I was pleased to see that you did permit the 30 minutes at 8 o'clock. I disagreed completely with it being at eight o'clock. It should be the first item on the agenda, to permit as many people as is possible to speak I'm glad to see that you have put it on the agenda to be an actual open discussed item two weeks from now.
One of the things that's most troubling, and I think Betsy this might seem a little bit like Groundhog Day for you. Every couple of weeks, I don't expect this is going to change until you change. I don' expect this to change until you are upfront and honest with the people of Ojai about these conflicts of interest that daily or weekly we get additional information evidence which is substantiating some of these allegations. I personally hope they're not true, I pray they're not true but more and more the evidence is pointing otherwise.
I would like to encourage that when you all do your goal setting or prioritization meeting that top of that list will be establishing ethical standards by which all elected Uh, officials for the city will have to operate. Um, and that each of you will have to come in line with, um, based on your current positions. Thank you very much for your time and I'll look forward to this being restored to regular order. Thank you.
Thank you, Bob. Next we have Tina Bremont, Tina.
Hi, thank you for hearing me. Um...
And I wasn't ready to do that.
Hello?
Please proceed.
Thank you. I'm here to actually state the difference first of all, I would like to appreciate the City Council and especially Mayor Sticks for moving the commentary period towards the end of the meeting The filibustering that had been occurring at the previous meetings was an attempt to hijack the meeting, to dissuade the conversation, to impede the city's business. And I would like to state the absolute opposite of everything that I just heard from the previous commenters. I think this is a personal attack on Mayor Stix. I think the sooner that we get down to public business, the better. I think that the reach out of hand tonight between Susan and Mayor Stix to find a compromise is exactly what this community is needing. We need to move on with this and the personal attacks need to stop.
They need to stop now. Thank you.
Thank you, Tina.
Next we have Jacqueline Francis followed by Angelica Griffith. Jacqueline?
Hello, this is Jacqueline Francis. Can you hear me?
Yes.
Thank you. I live on Oak Glen and...
2:24 – 2:3115 turns
We lost you,
Jacqueline if you can hear us. Jacqueline? You can unmute again.
Okay, here let me start again. I'm Jacqueline Francis. I live on Oakland Avenue 41 year resident of the city of Ojai and before I retired I worked for the federal government for 33 years and one of my duties was as a contract overseer and we in that capacity we were taught that Not only could we not have conflicts of interest, but we couldn't even have the appearance of a conflict of interest because we were servants of the people.
And so I'm directing this to Mayor Sticks. Maybe in your heart you know that you don't have a conflict of interest, but surely you can see that to the public's eyes there is an appearance of a conflict of interest Therefore, I would request that you recuse yourself from any dealings that have to do with the City Council and Simply Ojai. Especially with the whole cottage development but anything else that has to do with Simply Ojai. Thank you.
Thank You Jacqueline.
Next we have Angelica Griffith. Angelica you have the floor?
Hi, this is actually Stuart Griffith. I'm on Angelica's phone and I want to comment on the recent happenings in City Council where simply Ojai High sues the city that Betsy Stix is closely tied to, and like the previous commenter said, even a perceived conflict of interest needs to be investigated. I used to have to answer questionnaires every year from the brokerage I worked for and they would ferret out any type relationship that would conflict with the organization I was a member of. So even a perceived conflict of interest has to be investigated, then when it's brought up in a closed session the foul language is used towards two ladies when it's the first day on the job for that council member Then when it's tried to be brought up in front of the city, public comment gets stifled by again three members of City Council.
I think it is an incredible lack of judgment on those three council members and the layers of lack of judgment on a couple of the council members. I would call on Sticks, Lang and Whitman to resign. I used to work for somebody that said, I don't want to be subtle because some people times people don't understand me. And I think that's pretty much where we're at beating around the bush and being settled. That is exactly what needs to happen right now. Sticks, Whitman and Lang should resign. Thank you.
Thank you, Stuart.
That's all on Zoom Mayor.
Okay, thank you very much. I
guess it's a point of order. You know when people speak on Zoom are you able to record their first and last name because sometimes I can't hear it and I do like to have everybody's first and last name?
So when people log in, they can put in their first and last name. But some people choose not to or like in that case, I think maybe he logged in under a family member's name. So that's why we call it a different name. OK, so so we have those if you want that information. I think we also include in the minutes we try to list everybody's names. Thank you. Yeah,
thank you.
Carol, I don't have a card from you. Okay. Do you want to go ahead?
Good evening again. I have been on the council a long time, I live at 23 Taormina Lane in the city all of you live in the city your constituents are the city residents please ask people for their address anyone can talk but it's important these are the people who voted for you or and can vote for you Unfortunately, Mayor Sticks, I agree with a lot of the speakers. I see no redeemable path for you to take when you went ahead and hired a lawyer secretly who was actually Recommended by the opposition's lawyer to represent the city in a lawsuit by a group that I have heard, one member was your campaign manager?
It's so, it's just the conflict of interest is just huge. I do not see how we can function in any way for the next two years with you Mayor. I'm not happy Mr. Whitman with what you did but I don't feel that it's an impeachable offense and Miss Lang, I don' feel you've done an impeachable offense but the whole idea of changing Public comments to the end. I would do that if I was you, who wants to hear all this bad stuff about you? I wouldn't want to hear it but that's not the point.
Also people come in what you can do, you collect the cards. The first 10 people who have cards that wanna speak in public non-agenda items have a chance to speak. If you give them two minutes each, that's 20 minutes, you still have time to shuffle around Try to adopt a system like that, thank you.
Thank You Carol all right That's the end of public comments we will move on to discussion of the reach codes
2:31 – 2:3712 turns
Anyone like to start Yeah, I'll
go ahead and start So
A quick point of order. Do we need, should we or is it normal to have a motion on the floor before we start discussion? Or do we do discussion... I mean I have in previous...
Historically the council has allowed either depending on the will of the council so discussion coalescing towards a possible motion or throw out a motion then discuss Rosenberg's rules encourages a motion then discussion, but it's not a requirement. Historically the council has done both as is applicable for a given item.
Okay thank you. Andy?
All right
so I'm gonna talk about the big picture first which is that We should have a climate plan moving forward. I don't think that prevents us from addressing reach codes, which is kind of a first step. But if there's anybody still in the public who thinks that we're planning to Take away existing gas appliances. I don't have any understanding that's the goal of anybody here, what we should be doing as a kind of next phase, I think is that we should be encouraging and educating the public on the cost effective ways of reducing your carbon consumption.
And I think that's you know a time for another agenda item, but I Do not think that we are moving rash Rashly that's a bad word I don't think we're moving too quickly to address climate change. I think as a society, we're moving way too slowly based upon the overwhelming science that we've received. I think that if we treated the planet as a patient we would conclude that the planet is sick and it's getting sicker as we go, and the cause of the sickness is too much carbon.
And it's affecting the planet in all kinds of horrible ways and we can do something for our future. It might end up being a small thing but it'll be something that we should be a part of the whole planet reducing its carbon consumption. So I wouldn't Well, so we talked about that language and the restaurants. And I do have an idea about how I'd like to fix it. So I want to bring it up so that Matt can think about this. But going back to section 917.04, So it's the final sentence that I think is kind of awkward, the way it's written.
And I don't like starting with except for...I think you say what you are going to do and then you identify the exceptions so I would say this chapter does not apply. After that first clause this chapter does not apply to any remodels or additions to existing buildings issued a certificate of occupancy Or equivalent final approval before January 1 2002 but then say But it does apply To remodels or additions that create new residential units. I And then leave the restaurant part off because I don't think that was intended to really be there.
Could you repeat the part where you said it applies to residential remodels? Okay,
so the chapter does not apply to any remodels or additions to existing buildings that were issued a certificate of occupancy. This language is in here already, but it doesn't apply to a remodel or addition that creates a new residential unit.
It doesn't apply to a remodel or an addition that creates... So for example if you turn your house into a duplex and it doesn' t apply?
No, it does apply. If you decide to remodel your house to be a duplex, it will apply to the new unit. So the new unit will have to be all electric but your original existing structure can remain with its gas infrastructure so you can still have gas appliances
So how, since you've done a remodel, how would that have impacted you? Would it have been alright?
2:37 – 2:4319 turns
Much safer for the inhabitant, especially in a small you know if it's 300 square feet. It's much much better in terms of what you're inhaling I mean that you can ask Steve call me but the it's like 1010 OK OK.
Yeah just one last comment. I think that I think that we can have an influence on other communities. I think that the big government is moving too slowly. Um, I think that we need to demonstrate both individuals and communities that were ready to do this and let them follow our lead meaning big government That this is what we want and that hopefully other communities will see what we're doing and do the same thing.
Who'd like to go next?
Yes, I would like to ask just a couple of clarifying questions because I am aware of the needs at the hospital And is there just simple language that we could put in about, you know, excluding public buildings or something?
Yeah. There is some language that would accomplish that. It would be to add a provision In a new sentence in that same 9-1704 that would read, this chapter does not apply to and what we would recommend there is to parrot from the public art code so it would read This chapter does not apply to projects undertaken by any agency of the state, county, the Ojai Unified School District or any governmental entity other than the city.
Or to non-profit social services projects which would pick up the hospital in similarly situated non-profit social service projects. And that could be narrowed or expanded as desired.
Okay, thanks. I just want to specify my... Can I? Is that okay if I specify my...? So I'm all for going with a clean reach code. I think I agree with what Council Member Whitman said that we need to be acting like this is a climate emergency, which it is. And at the same time I'm aware of what I believe it was Carol said, which was that milliseconds count when we're talking about people who are on life support and so I wouldn't want any one of our codes to make it more difficult for a hospital to keep people alive
Okay. All right, Susan? I'm
thinking along the same lines as Rachel and also I support I think all or most of what Councilmember Whitman said. I would like assurance that you know because you're taking notes but I haven't actually seen it perhaps we can see it on the consent calendar but you know I mean we're making I don't know if we're making changes that Require another reading or where we're at, but I want us because this is not my area of expertise Generators and all of that. I try to understand it and we've got a number of new comments and concerns today. I Just want to make sure that It doesn't jeopardize emergency situations in nursing homes hospitals you know any of those types of agencies That we can be assured of that? Yeah.
I think with that language proposed, if that's accepted, that language would mitigate that risk there.
Okay. So I have a question though is...
Could you bring it back to the chair please? Yeah, go ahead. Sorry. Are you
finished? I have a question just on that specific topic. Was the concern of the hospital like Continual like this was going to impact them if they, you know build them or is it in the emergency situation? So could we do a carve-out for emergency circumstances so that we're not kind of creating a big exception. Yeah
Yeah, and the challenge was I got the sense it was sort of both circumstances for them. So I went through the same thought exercise of is it better to create just the exemption for a particular party that's more narrow or the circumstances that are the concern? So those are fair. One way to address it would be narrowing down. You know, we had suggested the language from the other code sections that referred to non-profit social services but maybe it's just non-profit social services providing medical treatment or something a little bit more
narrow. Non-profit hospital?
Yeah could just
be the hospital
too. But I think to councilmember Francine is concerned about the senior Serving facilities as well that might not be captured in the hospital. So
right then it'd be nonprofit Make it a health care provider
Yeah
2:43 – 2:506 turns
Leslie, do you want to? No go ahead. Okay Well, I agree with oh, I'm sorry.
Well, I want to be the final I'm not done What about I'm a big user of the laundromat this past year actually even before that occasionally and And I've seen how the managers struggles to keep the machines going. So if he wants to replace or he wants to redo his laundromat, is there funding? Are we mandating that he go all electric like what? I'm sure there's unintended consequences. It's almost unavoidable.
Under this proposed code, he could replace dryers with gas dryers because he's not remodeling or he's not building a new property. If somebody comes to town and decides they want to open a laundromat and build it from scratch that one would have to be built all electric so the current laundry mats can keep utilizing the gas dryers in the meantime There's nothing in this that would stop them from replacing current gas dryers
with gas dryers. And one more point on that one, an existing building that predates January 1st 2021 could be remodeled into a laundromat under the current proposal with gas infrastructure?
OK. But in the meantime, we can still reach out and encourage All Electric because I happen to know that one laundry mat looks like they're going to have to replace almost everything in there. So I would like part of this that we develop some kind of, you know, because this is our chance he could go all electric with a little encouragement with some encouragement and help possibly the one by the Y, Ben Franklin.
Also before we do a final, remember how last week I tweaked the language of the second sentence? And I would like to run by my colleagues. Let me see if I can, if you go to the attachment A, the first page of the ordinance. In the first whereas, I'll read it and then I can give a copy if necessary to James. Whereas the urgency and magnitude of the climate emergency necessitates that Ojai must reduce greenhouse gas emissions by using clean energy and reducing energy consumption.
And move, I'm not crazy about the word swiftly but I'll keep it, swiftly toward a zero carbon economy Does that add, do you feel like that's okay? And then we may not even need the second sentences but I'd like to have it just for emphasis. That's my favorite sentence in the ordinance actually whereas reducing energy consumption is critical to reducing emissions And this is where I do part ways with one of the speakers who seems to, and probably lots of people feel this way. They seem to think that by changing to all electric we can keep our all our comforts and that we're doing something good for the planet. And I can't emphasize enough that it's not that simple because you know you're throwing away all your pots and pans because you got to replace them if you get an induction stove And this is only something that really affects the wealthy part of the world.
We need to do it, it's a step in the right direction but if you think you can keep running your air conditioners and your dryers and not reduce your consumption then you're in what they call green washing, green denial. It's not gonna happen. It's not going to reduce,
you know the emergency we're in. Well I agree with my council members that we need to get off gas and oil fast and just a reminder that this ordinance is about no new gas hookups, no new gas infrastructure and this is the way the world is moving our country is moving so it just is common sense And I just want to remind everyone that we live in the fastest warming county in the continental US. It's gone up 4.7 degrees Fahrenheit, and we are all experiencing the effects of climate-driven aridification. That means more frequent serious weather issues, more fire, more floods, and it's going to happen more and more frequently.
So I really feel like this is the time, it's past time that we take action swiftly. We owe it to our kids and their kids. There's no more waiting around and back to Ruth Cooper's comment, we do have to make hard decisions sometimes And it is our moral responsibility to make this planet habitable for future generations. So I think that we just need to wake up to that fact and in terms of the history of this ordinance, it's really done nothing. It passed two and a half years ago and it exempted all 109 ADUs.
And so we've got to get rid of these loopholes because it's not doing anything and we need to do something now And in terms of, we've heard lots of good arguments and it's actually cheaper to go all electric at this point. And we can maintain our quality of life. On the other hand, we all need to make some personal sacrifices for the planet, for the children, for the animals, for the mountains.
And so I really am a strong proponent of this. And I think in terms of feasibility, that we can work out. We're a small city, so we know each other. If something is not going to work, we can talk about it and work it out. So I'm ready to make a motion any time. Oh, we could still discuss afterwards. Yeah. Leslie, do you want to say something?
2:50 – 2:557 turns
I live in this world where yes, we need to stop the use of fossil fuels. And I also live in the world where this is almost negligible and there's yet another world where we need to make a stronger and deeper commitment to all of this. And I fear that this is considered, you know, it is a small step. But it's a really, really, really tiny step. And I think we need also to speak to the fact that in another two years this will come back and we will start looking at Other ways that we can electrify. So let's just really be honest about that It has come up many times That this is a scope creep from the last reach code and we will have another scope creep And we will have another scope creep so that I mean to speak to Larry Steingold point, I think that that will happen I don't necessarily have a problem with that, but this is not the stopping of this particular code or ordinance.
It will come back and we will start taking away more and more. I don't necessarily have a problem with that. I would like to tie to this the idea of a climate action plan so I would. I don't know exactly how that would work- but I would like this to be the starting point of a climate action plan and have it fold into This particular greenhouse gas reduction, but also at the same time moving forward with a climate action plan. The Ventura Unincorporated County has one why wouldn't we be looking at that?
The Art Council was up here they're doing work so I would prefer not to come back and revisit this if we could just decide now and vote that this would be the initiative and the start of our climate action plan, then I would support it. But I have problems saying that you know This this is it because it's just yet the start and it doesn't put Forward and front front and forward the idea that we need to make some really deep changes And also, we need the community. It has to be a community action plan We need to have The community contribute to this because as we've seen We're not bringing the community with us, all of them. We're bringing some of them with us but we're not bringing all of them with us and the way that you get implementation and buy-in is you bring people with you so people of goodwill and honest intentions will find a way to move forward.
So my motion would be that we pass this I don't know exactly how I would phrase this but tie it to Also having a climate action plan instructing James to think of ways and different models that this can move forward. I know that it has been proposed before, and it seems to me that would be one way to bring the community with us which is very important. So I am making a motion, I need some help wording it.
That we approve this particular, like I would exempt ADUs but okay, I'm okay with that. That we move forward with the carve outs that we have for public health and that we also tie it to a climate action plan model. So I would instruct the city administrator to do that. You better have probably a better word than I do. Right, and I think
one way to do that would be pass it with the language regarding the medical services, the language recommended by Sousa, that additional sentence. Am I missing any? And the rejiggering of the final sentence in section 9 right you know every statement of the final sentence or Whitman and with also with direction for staff to return with an item to Consider and develop a climate action plan At one of the upcoming meetings So we
have the
motion do
we have a
second?
Yeah, assuming that's one clarification on that the key point is that it's direction for staff to return with options regarding a climate action plan Not on tonight's agenda. So we can't adopt one. We can't write a climate action plan tonight Yes, yes. Yes, but the direction can be to return with options regarding correct models So a number of cities have done climate action plans. You should be able to Okay, so we
2:55 – 3:0337 turns
Okay, we have a motion.
Yes I think we talked about different options about how to deal with possibly the hospital only possibly health care institutions And we could say facilities licensed under health and safety code 1250 because that encompasses just about every type of healthcare facility.
We'll check that and see if that
covers everyone. Or are we gonna do the broader language that Matt said they would? I was concerned that that was a little too broad in exempting people from, I'm more than happy to listen to an organization come in and tell us what their Concerns are and how we can adapt to them, but I don't like the idea of just carving out a great big swath. I mean schools aren't building new buildings there.
Buildings are disappearing so I'm not sure we have to include them on being exempted, but that's
Can I make a comment? I would agree with Andy on that. I think we should, I'm not in favor of carve-outs. I think we have an appeal process and feasibility clause that would cover that and you know take care of people. Of course we're not going to be unreasonable
with the exception of health care facilities.
Staff would support moving forward with using Health and Safety Code section 1250 as the definition, I'll read that briefly. Health facility means a facility, place or building that is organized maintained and operated for the diagnosis care prevention and treatment of human illness physical or mental including convalescence and rehabilitation. And including care during and after pregnancy or for any one or more of these purposes for one or more persons to which the persons are admitted for a 24 hour stay or longer and includes the following types general acute care hospital Acute Psychiatric Hospital, Skilled Nursing Facility, Intermediate Care Facility, Intermediate Care Facility slash Developmentally Disabled Habilitative Facility Special Hospital, Intermediate Care Facility and Congregant Living Health Facility or Correctional Treatment Center of which we have nine in the city.
and nursing facility, and hospice facility. So it's in short medical facility where folks stay for 24 hours or longer not a standard outpatient doctor's office. And thank you Councilwoman Wooden for the citation. Okay
all right so we do can I just wait wait excuse me hold on can you bring back the chair but we do have a motion do we have a second?
I thought that he wanted more clarification. I'll second.
Yeah, if that's the language we're going to use now and we're going to fix that one...
I want to fix one more thing. Okay. Go ahead, Susan. Does this include veterinary hospitals? Animal shelters?
The proposal from Council Member Whitman does not exempt anything that provides care for animals, only for humans. That is a choice. Could we add that? It could be added.
Emergency care for animals.
That could be added by
the
council. I would
second that. Thank you, Council Member Rule, for reverting to animals!
Alright, we have a motion with a second.
And now we can, and the motion includes some kind of task force. But I would want that brought back with more certainty because the housing somehow faded to number 13, the Housing Task Force. I don't want that to happen. I think those are the two most important things that we can actually do right now is have these community task forces for housing and climate change
And so I just want to make sure it's because it was climate action plan. Yeah, the kind of item to discuss climate a climate actual plan and options for that It's not necessarily the same thing as a task force Okay, I'm just
saying that ice when I read your agenda
right? I
saw that it was faded
Climate Yeah, and I think there's a consensus that we would want to do the Climate Action Plan or at least start talking about that fairly quickly. So I think we'd try to aim for that being at the next two to three meetings.
Point of order. Do I need to amend my motion to include veterinary hospitals? Did Susan amend that? I
believe
there was a motion and a second. Yeah, if
you accept it you
can
amend your motion. No, I
accept it as friendly
amendment. And the seconder I'm gathering accepts it.
Before we vote can we still make a few comments?
Sure and I mean I really understand where my council members are coming from. I still feel that with that feasibility clause we can work with all these individual groups And come up with good solutions. And also encourage, we need to be encouraging everyone to go all electric, no new gas hookups. So I would be in favor of no exemptions using the infeasibility and being reasonable with people. Of course, we're gonna support the hospital and veterinary clinics and people with health issues. I just think we should make a really clean code. And be a beacon of sustainability for our whole state.
And let's be leaders in this, let me finish my sentence please. Let's be leaders here and let me finish my sentence please. We have to do things that are hard it is our moral responsibility to our children and our children's children to seven generations so I feel confident in city staff to be able to and our commissions To work through this and make it work for everybody.
Substitute motion. I mean, I want to
Okay
One thing
that I want to say just to just as a point of clarification That even if we don't include that language the hospital and the animal hospitals basically any existing building would The generators would not be affected so really what we're talking about is Brand-new hospital being built or the hospital builds a wing Separate so it's so it we're ultimately this really wouldn't affect current operations
3:03 – 3:0821 turns
Okay, Susan
okay my understanding of this was also tied to generators and emergency services That they wouldn't have to come
Correct.
I prefer the language that Councilmember Whitman added, I think everybody anybody reading this would feel More assured and more apt to do the right thing you know
So here's the Here's the counter on that and I might be changing my mind about that because When they so I was very interested in the emergency generator issue But what I learned when I researched it over the last couple of weeks is that there's a huge issue with earthquake risk and running gas lines to your generator. And so, it is safer to have a diesel Backup generator and you know, I'm I think maybe I would amend in and say that Well, I would support Reducing the carve-out To simply address on Diesel and gas options for that. So
and we have the infeasibility clause Okay, yes
listen so I would say It is bad policy to make a law and then say the Commission's will be reasonable when it comes to them I think our job is to make make a law that doesn't require them Um, to have to have to interpret what is reasonable and what is not reasonable. I mean they have to naturally that comes to them anyway but I would not be comfortable Passing something that said oh, but down the road That commission will be reasonable about that or that Commission will be reasonable about that. I have no Absolutely, no confidence that that is the case. I know that so for me that is a bad way to legislate and You know, I'm not saying that I might just be talking on principle but that is not a way I would legislate to say Let you know we have reasonable commissions.
Well, we might now but we might not in five years and and finally I'm not in support of clawing back the carve out for emergency services. We don't know what the future is going to bring we don't know if someone's gonna want to build a new vet hospital or a new hospital in the next two years and not be able to do it, we have no idea if we really believe that emergency services and life support are worth carving out, then that's what we should do.
And you know, we can try as Councilman Whitman said with education and things like that. We know that things are moving towards electrification. I don't believe in a life support system we need to mandate something or hope that the commission down the road would be reasonable about it. So I would not accept that amendment. And just a reminder that appeals do come back to the council. I understand, but even the council, you know, even the council in five years who knows?
Is there a substitute motion anyone like to make? Oh, I
support it. What?
Okay. Do we have a substitute motion?
No.
I would make a motion to remove all the exemptions and just have the infeasibility clause if there's no support though for that.
Can I ask a clarifying question? So, what I was thinking with the emergency care and especially with what Council Member Whitman was saying that it wouldn't necessarily... That we could add it to the Section 917 That we could add that without making it like a specific exemption. You know?
Yeah,
that is what we were proposing was putting that language in 9-1704 so it wasn't necessarily creating an exemption. It's just defining that health facilities are not covered projects.
Correct. Okay, we have a motion and we have a second. Yes Right so I just
want
to
mention the
first speaker
brought up the gas explosion about earthquakes and just a moment ago somebody else
3:08 – 3:1421 turns
But remember that the Thomas fire, correct me if I'm wrong, was caused by an electrical fire. So let's look at both those things and not just worry about gas explosions. And what?
I was going to say that- Yeah.
When one person finishes speaking, please wait your turn. So Leslie? Are you through, Susan?
Well I would like to say that when we discuss council protocols and ethics that we discuss this constant reminder that you just gave us where as long as we're having civil discourse sometimes the conversation flows more easily
You
have a right to run the meetings like you want, but I have a right to say that sometimes there's a natural conversation. We're not children. We're elected officials.
We are adults. I understand that, but no cross-talk though. Are you finished? I was just going
to second Susan's about electrical fires. I'm from Northern California and the largest fires that we've had were caused by PG&E faulty equipment, so when we talk about gas explosions, Energy in and of itself is an incredibly powerful, powerful force. And I don't think we, to Suze's point can isolate gas from electric as well or the sun or anything so.
Okay, all right. Well we have a motion and we have a second could we have the roll?
So We've made quite a few tweaks I'm not clear if this is our final vote or if we get to see the revised ordinance and because this is so Important you know, I've been told oh we can just amend it but it's not that easy It has to get back on the agenda. It can take up to six months or longer for it to go back, so I would like to be clear is this considered the final vote?
What do my colleagues have in mind with all these changes?
Yeah, essentially I think our response is it's Council's option. The changes were not to a level that we would be required to completely kind of restart the process so the council could adopt it tonight or if the council doesn't want to adopt it until they see it and have time to review it that could be done as well
Agreed so I would take it back to the city manager and City Council if they're clear on what we communicated, you know through the five of us enough to Draft it. I'm ready to move forward with that
Okay So III would like to not have this come back But so you'll, you can email us a copy. Yes. And if there's some little tweak, you could do that on the consent calendar or something? So we don't have to have another hearing or doesn't work. It's
adopted tonight or come back next time. We can't just put it on. Okay, we couldn't do that with an email and that would not work. Yeah what I would suggest is why don't we recite? Well, we understand the motion to be So that all are clear what would be voted upon that may be wise
okay, would you Would you repeat
so what I understand is going in order attachment a page one and The first whereas would be revised, whereas the urgency and magnitude of the climate emergency necessitates that Ojai must reduce greenhouse gas emissions by using clean energy and reducing energy consumption moving swiftly toward a zero carbon economy. It wasn't clear to me if there was a change in the second whereas? That I confess I didn't quite gather.
Yeah. Whereas reducing energy consumption Wait, whereas reducing energy consumption is critical to reducing emissions. Just very simple.
Is critical to reducing emissions.
It highlights what's actually in the first paragraph.
And I'll note that recitals have no legal effect and therefore there's no concerns regarding those changes from a legal perspective. Next, section 9-1704. The last sentence would be modified to read this chapter does not apply to any remodels or additions to existing buildings issued a certificate of occupancy or equivalent final approval before January 1st 2021 but does apply to remodels or additions creating new residential units which is a rejiggering of the existing sentence and deleting any reference to restaurants.
Second, a new sentence will be added that this chapter does not apply to... Any health care facility is defined by Health and Safety Code section 1250-1250 or any emergency animal care facility. No other changes. All
right, thank you Matt. We have a motion and we have a second. Could we have the roll call please Weston?
Roll-call vote Passed 4–0 motion and we have a second. Could we have the roll call · 1 under review
Show transcript
3:14 – 3:2645 turns
Motion passes
Okay, thank you very much. All right,
we will move on to item number three, Valley Parking Initiative. So tonight we'll receive public comment on this item and direct staff to take no action, to draft an ordinance to amend the Ojai Municipal Code to ban off-site valley parking for consideration by the council or to draft an initiative amending the municipal code for submission to the voters for consideration of approval. James, do we have a staff report?
Yes and the City Attorney will provide the staff report on this item.
Yes, thank you Mayor and Council. Briefly the item on the agenda is regarding A valet parking initiative, but not on the agenda as the initiative. Rather it's for the council to consider whether or not to, as a policy choice, move forward an ordinance that would regulate valet parking as may be directed by the council. Three options, direct staff to take no action.
Direct staff to draft an ordinance in return that would amend the Ojai Municipal Code to prospectively prohibit or regulate valet parking For future consideration by City Council. In other words, no ordinance can be adopted tonight but you could direct staff to draft one or direct staff to draft an initiative that would be submitted to the voters to do the same thing regulate or prohibit valet parking as a sub option for all of those. You could refer the matter to the Planning Commission or create a separate committee to consider the matter.
The basic facts are, as I think everyone is aware, the Planning Commission approved a remodel of the Hotel El Roblar in April of last year That project relies upon valet parking at one of the off-site parking lots and one of the on-site lots. The other off-site lot is not valet parking. The project was appealed, the City Council upheld the project's approval On May 10th, 2022, thereby approving the project.
In the midst of that time period, project opponents circulated an initiative petition that would have prohibited off-site valet parking. The matter was... The initiative rather was circulated. It was presented to the city The city clerk rejected it in October. November of last year, reciting among other things that the requirement for providing proof of publication by the proponent had not been met. The proponents filed suit to challenge that decision suing the city clerk and the city itself.
That matter is not yet come up for hearing, the City Council has been asked to consider a settlement which would In essence, if moved forward would be to consider as a policy matter adopt the similar ordinance or the exact ordinances proposed or something similar in return for which plaintiffs may choose to dismiss their suit and move it forward. As noted, the council has a number of options direct staff to prepare an ordinance that would prohibit or regulate or some combination thereof on- or offsite valet parking Either substantially the same language as proposed by the initiative or any other language, as may be adjusted by the council as desired.
And the council could also take no action or submit it to the voters or refer it to a committee or commission. And I think with that, that's a brief summary of the options and the issues. Happy to answer any questions or, of course, more
information. Any questions? Questions from Council?
Yes. How does the Planning Commission currently handle valet parking?
At the moment, the City has no specific regulations regarding valet parking. Therefore it is allowed if approved for any given project. Only projects of which I am aware in the city that have valet parking off-site, off-site valet parking is the Hotel Arrobalar presently under construction which was approved by the Planning Commission and approved by the City Council.
So it's approved as part of the whole project?
Right so any given project that came in that relied on off-site valet parking would have to ask for it and then get approval.
So for example, it's unlikely if a hotel would like to buy a lot in the couple of miles away and use it for value. The Planning Commission could reject that already.
Right on with the appropriate findings and record supporting the decision
because the findings would show that it would increase traffic and you know whatever.
Right the planning commission couldn't so could make that choice it would depend on the facts on the table so I think it'd be defensible if it was miles away
yeah so there's no formal regulation yet the Planning Commission Can look at the pros and cons, the merits. They have the power to say you cannot do this. This is
an appropriate record? Yes.
Yeah, yeah. And now my other... May I ask another question? When you say on page 2 The second paragraph, there is ongoing litigation related to the city clerk's rejection of the initiative. I have a question about that but first I'll ask the next part. The parties are currently in negotiations regarding a possible settlement of the lawsuit. When you say that, you're not talking about a financial settlement or are you?
No. At present, there has been no consideration of money to be paid to anybody.
Okay.
The present proposal would be if the council were to adopt something similar to the initiative, the plaintiffs could choose to dismiss the suit.
Okay and then my other question I sent you that question this morning along with another flurry of emails can you clarify for me the city clerk she's an elected official
mm-hmm
yes and doesn't she have some kind of protection against lawsuits
So, yeah a couple of responses. So the city would provide an attorney for the city clerk. The city clerk could still be sued as we've recently found out. I think I sent a flurry of emails that probably just caused more confusion but we did talk to our CJPIA, our insurance provider today and they haven't rejected the claim yet But they also then told us, basically it looks like they're going to reject the claim. We got that back after I sent the last email. It looks like they are gonna reject the claim for insurance coverage for...
The preliminary statement is that they're gonna reject a claim subject to formal confirmation but yes, the city's required to indemnify the City Clerk for any lawsuit stemming from her official duties under Government Code Section 825. And the city has done so. The city has provided counsel for the City Clerk and I represent the city council. Okay,
I'm not finished with questions can I continue? How much do you estimate that this has cost the city so far in staff hours and possibly if the insurance doesn't cover it what is this going to cost the city? So far what has it cost?
Yeah, we can I disclose the agreement with the clerk's
attorney? The clerk is the client. We don't have her consent. Okay sorry I should turn my microphone off. The budget amounts We don't have a precise estimate, but our estimate would be something in the low tens of thousands of dollars.
I think to date, I would estimate $10,000-$15,000 is a rough estimate and the longer that we go through that lawsuit process, that will start to go
up. If it were litigated in full, it would depend in part upon what the City Council directs as a position relative to the city clerk Mindful the city's paying for both of those attorneys and they could work on the same goals or separate goals. If it's litigated in full, it would get substantial.
What was the last thing you said?
It would get substantial. The cost would be substantial
Okay, now does that depend on whether we approve an initiative similar to or whatever We do what they want I mean this almost sounds a little bit like the Becker black Potentially
proposing a settlement
right if the council were to adopt an ordinance that met the goals of the plaintiffs and met the goals of the majority of the council If those goals are aligned, those costs can be avoided.
But
there's a policy question inherent in there. What does the council want?
Just to be clear, so far you said regardless of what we do tonight this has already cost the city $10,000-$15,000? I think that's accurate. Okay and then is that include the staff hours or is that...
No, that cost is straight legal fees. Yeah, that's just legal fees so staff time another $5,000 perhaps at this point.
Okay, so Simply Ojai has cost us ten to fifteen thousand dollars.
One clarification on that point the named plaintiff is Leslie Hess? Yes. Not the organization?
Okay, yes. I have other questions. So given that the plaintiff Leslie Hess has this is a Levine question but I'm going to make a request that Mayor Betsy Sticks and Rachel Lang recuse themselves You have a relationship with Leslie Hess. She was your campaign treasurer, and then your campaign assistant treasurer. She paid you $2,000 in the campaign donation. Rachel, you got $500 from her? I think there is a clear conflict of interest here. We can go further in if we need to about language used, similar language. I would respectfully request that both of you recuse yourself.
If this had happened six months ago, the Levine Act would be pertinent. And in fact there was a recommendation by the FPPC that it be retroactive. That was not followed through. That was not followed through as a recommendation by General Counsel of the FPPC that it be retroactive but because of this complete and utter connection with Leslie Hess as well as simply Ojai because there is an aligned An allied nonprofit that is noted in the indictment that can only be one nonprofit So I am I am respectfully requesting my council members do the right thing here and recuse themselves We know that it's not legal, but we absolutely know that. It's ethical my son who is
a question
You're asking mr..
Summers to respond to that I
3:26 – 3:3211 turns
I am asking Mr. Summers what is the process for asking for recusal? Before
we do that, could Mr. Summers explain the Levine Act for the public that's watching?
Yes, I would appreciate that opportunity. The Levine Act is a law that has been on the books since the 1980s that required before January 1st, 2023 It required appointed officials, typically planning commissioners, other commissioners to recuse from any matter under their consideration as a city official related to a person who had donated more than $250 to a campaign account controlled by that person. The key here is that it applies to campaign donations of more than 250 for appointed officials not elected officials. That's before January 1st 2023. That's been on the books since the 80s January 1st, last year the legislature adopted an amendment to the Levine Act. The AB 1439 that applies January 1st 2023 and forward to elected and appointed officials so now the Levine Act applies to the City Council members and all appointed officials And has the same basic rule, anyone who is donated more than $250 to an account controlled by a candidate who is then elected.
The council member must recuse from a consideration of matter related to the donor where the donor is an applicant I'm January 1st, 2023 and forward. Therefore all campaign contributions in the last election cycle before January 1st 2023 do not count for Levinat purposes so there is no legal requirement for anyone on the City Council to recuse from any matter related to any campaign donor for any amount of money before January 1 2023 To the best of my knowledge, there have been no campaign donations after January 1st 2023 given the election timing.
If any have been made I would ask that the City Council please let me know and we will analyze them but again i'm not aware of any after January 1st 2023. There's no requirement to recuse for anything related To count campaign donations to count council members before January 1st, 2020.
So I have a clarifying so we're talking about what is legal? Correct
that was the question yes
so what is legal um so my son is a barrister and he does white collar crime and the first thing he said to me was if anyone tells you the first thing they say to you is I didn't do anything illegal Okay. Um, all right. We will move on to public comment.
My understanding is that if the initiative gets through the legal challenge and then goes to the voters, and the voters approve it, that we are then going to be in a position of limited ability to change our valet parking if we see things differently. So, if we want to have more control in the future over valet parking to the extent it becomes an issue, we're better off passing an ordinance whatever it might be and then retaining control to address And one clarification, if the initiative petition is ordered by a court
of competent jurisdiction to
be presented to the City Council, then the council will have two choices. Submit it to the voters or adopt it. If adopted, it would be then as if the voters had approved it and then it would be amendable only by the voters.
So my next question is you addressed what happens if a We have a new project that wants to do valet parking, but we haven't addressed yet what happens if an existing business Decides I want valet parking are they? Do they have to come to the city for a permit to do that. Is it considered a Variance of their grant of authority to run their business or how does that fit in or do they have carte blanche just to Start ballet if we don't regulate it
If an existing business seeks to add off-site valet parking That would require City approval The key word is off-site valet parking, which is what this initiative picks up. It's distinct from on-site valet parking where the cars never leave that property.
3:32 – 3:3822 turns
I'm still confused.
Let me, if I could clarify that point. On-site, off-site. On site valet parking you drive up from the perspective of the consumer, you drive up onto a property park, hand your keys to a valet attendant who then gets in your car and parks it on that property. They never go back on a road, they never go back on a public road. That's onsite valet parking which is not the subject of the initiative.
Offsite valet parking you drive your car to a business or on the street, you hand your keys to an attendant who then picks it up and drives it to a different location crossing streets to get to a different parcel and parks it there and brings it back to you at the end of the evening. Off-site valley parking is subject, is what this ordinance is seeking to.
Right so but under current law So if we did nothing under current law, if some business in town decided it wanted to start valet parking, it would have to come to the city with a proposal for doing that and obtain approval. And who is in charge of that approval?
Any business that exists now that seeks to add off-site valet parking would have to come to the Planning Commission for approval of a design review permit with the appropriate traffic findings. Which, of course, is appealable to the Council.
Any final questions? Yes, Susan.
I still do not understand what the concern is if the Planning Commission can... I guess I would use the word regulate. They can... The five body planning commission can decide whether this is a good idea for Ojai or not. So do you understand what the concern is? Can you explain it in a way that the public can understand
You're saying why the proponents are asking
for this? Or maybe they'll come to the podium. They must be worried about something
I think the idea It's hard to like just speak for them But I think the idea would be certainty, you know The the Planning Commission may or may not approve it they want certainty that it's not going to be approved I think that's really
Do you have another question?
I'm sorry Matt, but I missed Just about everything from Andy on now. I think when you were explaining then you could come back to the council with this or this or you know, I'm sorry, I just I don't know what you said. So if you could repeat that part of it a little bit slower so that I can do an if-then kind of thing with my head, that would be great. Thank you.
So offsite valley parking means... No
no not that part. I get the part. Offsite and onsite. That I get. It was really about the initiative. What we do. If we You know what I'm talking about like the
whole. If an initiative is petition has sufficient signatures which this did of people who live who are registered voters in the city, which this did then the City Clerk and it complies with all procedural requirements then the City Clerk certifies it And it comes to the City Council. That last step is where this initiative failed.
Okay.
The city clerk did not certify it because it did not meet all procedural requirements in her independently elected judgment.
Right, I got that part.
Then the proponents filed suit. If the outcome of the lawsuit is a court order, final court order, that the initiative meets all requirements then it would come to the City Council as if certified by the clerk. In other words, if the proponents win the suit claiming that it should have not been rejected by the clerk then it would come to the City Council as if the clerk had certified it. The City Council would then have two choices.
Submit it to the voters for the voters to adopt or reject or adopt it. Okay. If the council adopted it then it would be as if the voters had adopted it which is critical because then the clause regarding future amendment only by the voters would kick in Okay. As distinct from if the council adopts an ordinance by first and second readings in three votes, three or more votes, then it's amendable by the council at will. By first, second reading, three or more votes. And that was Councilman Whitman's point? Right. His point is... Very good point.
And to sort of answer both Mayor Francine's question and Council Member Whitman's question. The proponents are seeking two things from what I don't know them like this is based on 10 years of experience in this business the proponents are seeking certainty against a future council, and they're seeking certainty that another project akin to El Robar will not be approved with off-site valet parking That is their apparent goal. And the only way to do that is if a certified initiative petition comes to the City Council and is adopted by the council or by the voters, that's the only way to prevent a future council from changing the rule. And that seems to be their goal based on the actions they've taken.
But in reality, a future council can overturn this council's decision.
Only if this council adopts it as proposed now by first and second reading. Had they achieved their original goal of winning an initiative petition or if they try another petition and don't screw up the procedural requirements then they could accomplish that ultimate goal.
So that's so ironic. So just to make sure I understand, if it goes through the voters nobody could change it? The voters can't change it. There are a lot of troubles. Only the voters can change it and this current council can't change it nor can a future council we don't know what the world will be like 10 years from now okay
all right well we will move on to public comment first we have Barbara Bowman then Clay Creasy and then Bill Miley
3:38 – 3:435 turns
Thank
you. OK, Barbara Bowman, commercial property owner. I don't have valet parking. Let me start off with that. This is a problem or this is a situation looking for a problem that's never existed. We've been here 100 years. We've never had a problem with valet parking. I don't picture these little mom-and-pop stores of 600 square feet, you know, getting valet parking. We have the El Robler Hotel which has its own parking lot that they use and one off site. We are never going to approve another hotel downtown. The rate this is going, I don t think you could approve a swimming pool downtown. So I think this whole lawsuit is like you re being blackmailed into creating A rule that there will never be valet parking, and if you don't do that we're going to continue this lawsuit.
That's like blackmail! And that means everybody who isn't happy with something can run out get petitions and force it on a city council and blackmail them into situations because if you don't do this we're gonna do this so do we really want to get in the circle that were constantly being blackmailed over problem that has never existed And we've created all this time on a problem that's never existed, and all this time we're talking about you can't have public comments because we have such important business that we have to do at the City Council. This is business we're spending on that's never been a problem! In 100 years it hasn't been a problem. The commercial space downtown is so tiny It's not, we don't have lots and lots and lots. And if anything I probably have the only lot.
And let's say the music festival for their holiday home tour wants to take little vans and drive people to the homes which they do and they want to park on my lot does that make that illegal? It hasn't happened! But they're always asking me to do something for them. Should we not support the Ojai Valley Music Festival? Should we not support the Playwrights' Conference? Should we not support any of these people that they may come to a point where they want to use van service to get people to park in one area and drive them, that isn't commercial, isn't a hotel? I mean you have to if you want to look at far-reaching projects you have to look at the big picture and the big picture so far is it's all been the wonderful things that we have from Tennis tournament to the music festival, the playwrights conference.
These are the people that would probably need this in the future if anybody needed it. You want to step on them and say no you can't? I mean you're acting like we're gonna have chain hotels come downtown and it's not going to happen. It's just not going to happen in this town so you're chasing a problem that doesn't exist. I say you do no action or...I would spend no more time on this. I think it should go dead tonight nothing else happened on it And this lawsuit thing to me is blackmail, out and out blackmail. And I think that's really embarrassing. I think it's embarrassing for the people that initiated it and I think if you keep helping them and award them, it's like when somebody gets kidnapped or they say you don't give them the money because then they're going to keep kidnapping people, well it's the same thing.
This looks to me like something that's just going to keep happening.
And next we have Clay Creasy and then Bill Miley and then Kim Barnes
Thank You City Council, I'm Clay Creasy live in Ojai Since I have three minutes and not two. I'll point out mayor's takes my last name is Creasy not crazy So no problem. I've been called worse things as they say on Broadway call me anything just call me and Anyhow, with regard to this issue when you enact an ordinance as you know you typically have a number of whereases in the front such as whereas climate change is a problem or things like that. I challenge Sorry, I apologize.
It's a little short for me. I challenge anybody to think of a logical whereas that addresses the public health safety or welfare issue that valet parking would address. It is good not bad. I certainly agree with prior speaker that the chances of another one happening is very low But it helps people who are disabled, who can't park themselves. It helps people who don't know the city that well, who might drive round and round blocks trying to find a parking place or park in places that are not legal.
It provides jobs for the folks who do the valet parking. It has a lot of good things But let's face facts, the reason we're even talking about it all is not because there's a legitimate debate between values on two sides. It's viewed as a cultural issue that we don't want Ojai to have the aura of elitism Valet parking tends to Produce in some folks minds. So I think I agree with prior speaker We should just drop it you should we should not give into blackmail and those are my thoughts on this issue. Thank you
Thank You clay Next, we have Bill Miley then Kim Barnes and Carol Smith
3:44 – 3:494 turns
Good evening. For the record, my name is Bill Miley. In my opinion, the question of yes or no to valet parking being banned is part of a much bigger issue. Traffic congestion and parking availability in our city's downtown economy and its traffic dynamics. So the question is what do we do with vehicles driven into our city downtown area? It's the basic question.
So we have ordinances that require certain parking spaces for each business. We don't always enforce them. I'm going to assume that those folks wanting to ban valet parking do so for a bunch of reasons, but one of which is giving special treatment to guests and customers. I gather their attitude is to prevent anyone from being treated with extra care than the rest of us residents in Ojai.
Traffic and parking generate trouble. Congestion, pollution, visual obstructions, nasty noise, risky walking, fender benders, pedestrian injuries, pedestrian deaths, oiled roadways and parking lots, and vehicle insecurity. An injustice to the environment. Space for vehicles to roam and park. The way we do parking now is all on one level. I think it can be considered an injustice to our environment.
Valley parking offsite is a small part of a bigger issue, traffic and parking. So here's what I suggest. My vision for Ojai is to have a multi-level parking facility which serves the downtown area. It reduces the land that we use for one level parking, it clears up vehicle...it's a clear destination for vehicles, it allows downtown street parking to be limited, permits more open visual space, and allows more free movement for bicycles and pedestrians so I suggest Your council placed valet parking into the larger issue of traffic, congestion and parking needs and requirements. And reenact past council decision to have the planning commission conduct public discussions on parking and traffic which past city councils have done.
Thanks.
Thank you Bill. Next we have Kim Barnes then Carol Smith.
Hi, my name's Kim Barnes and I live in Susan District. I'm opposed to any action... I'm opposed to any action on this valet parking item for the following reasons. First nothing can or should be addressed. Excuse me. Until the central pressing issue of Betsy Sticks, egregious improprieties are resolved. Letting bad behavior go unaddressed is often worse than the bad behavior itself.
So to that end we now have approximately 1,000 signatures on transparent Ojai's petition for the district attorney and the grand jury to investigate Betsy Sticks and her relationship with Simply Ojai. What would be better for all is for Betsy to resign, for the credibility of our government and the good of the city. That said, yes this is about not doing anything until these issues are resolved.
But there are other reasons to abandon any action regarding valet parking tonight. If your concern about fossil fuels was sincere, you would readily concede that valet parking is much better for the environment than drivers orbiting needlessly looking for a parking space. Banning valet parking discriminates against people with disabilities. There are many people, the elderly and the infirm, the disabled who absolutely need to use valet parking Valley parking creates jobs.
When we're always moaning about how everything is so expensive for ordinary folks, it would be nice to actually create jobs for people. And finally we come back of course to Simply Ojai. The city should fight Ms. Hess and Simply Ojai's lawsuit against valley parking. A simple motion would be a heck of a lot cheaper than running yet another ballot measure. I finally have to add that the mere appearance of conflict of interest should drive you to recuse yourselves, Councilmembers Sticks, Whitman and Lange. Simply Ojai and Leslie Hess actively supported and contributed to you in your election campaigns.
They paid the $438 publication fee for the valet parking petition, gathered all the signatures, and I'll bet it even paid the filing fees for the lawsuit. Any vote by you on this issue will look like payback, and it probably is. Recuse yourselves. For all these reasons, you should take no action on valet parking. Thank you,
Kim. Carol Smith?
3:49 – 4:0329 turns
Have you ever been in a city? Oh, Carol Smith 23 Terminal Lane in the City of Ojai. I can't tell you how strongly I resent you not at people ask them for their address if they want to not give it they could give it Okay, how do we earn our living? Cities who do not have a way to earn a living or tax themselves are in terrible shape. The streets are cracked. The main street has storefronts that are empty.
Parks look horrible. There's no recreation department. What is our business? Is our business A factory outlet malls like Camarillo? No. Do we want it to be our business? No. Is our business car dealerships? No, what is our business tourism? The TOT that is paid by our tourists in our hotels supports, TOT is Transit Occupancy Tax. It pays for our beautiful parks. It pays for our recreation departments.
It pays for our wonderful police service. If we didn't have our TOT from tourism, our town wouldn't look anything like it does now. It would be a wreck. Libby Ball, people didn't want to build it. Oh, we don't want to build anything. No, no. I had three people on the council who didn't want to put money in. That was a great deal. The Ojai Music Festival offered to pay one-third of the cost for the new ball.
They'd raise one third of the money but this city had to come up with one third. A fabulous deal. But still they were saying, oh I don't know. It'll bring traffic, more tourists. People don't realize tourism is our business. So what happened was that some of the basically the Ojai Festival Bowl folks showed up at a meeting and they looked at the council and said look it doesn't have to be the Ojai Festival Bowl.
It could be the Solvang Festival Bowl It could be the Goleta Festival Bowl. In other words, the Libby Bowl was falling apart but they were giving us a great deal if we reject it so be it! There won't be no more O'Hare Festival. Finally, a few light bulbs went on in people's head and we got the money. So do not... I feel like we're being bullied This is tourists who come to our town. They go downtown, they park over there by the skateboard park or whatever. We don't have a problem. Why are we being sued by, of all groups, simply Ojai over this? Try to make this go away with as little possible money spent by the city. Thank
you. Thank you Carol. Weston any public comments online?
Yes first we have Tina Berman followed by Larry Steingall.
Thank you. I wanted to address the valet issue and want to make sure that you have a broader understanding of the impacts of this issue. This issue is not really about valet parking. It's about certain businesses use of valet parking in order to overdevelop the footprint of their business and spillover into community common shared space. I am very upset over the lack of analysis by the planning department, and the approval of the El Roblar Hotel at the size and scope that it was approved.
The traffic study that was provided by the developer to the planning department stated that there would be one net car increase per day over the previous business. That is, it's bonkers! It's junk information that the developer paid for This is my concern, Susan, is that we cannot rely upon the planning commission to do a proper analysis of these reports that they're getting. The Oaks of Ojai had been operating at maybe 60% capacity for years. For them to base their traffic study off of that business which is not a like-for-like replacement is ridiculous.
The pending opening of the Ojai Movie Theater is another example of a business that's likely to make too big of an impact for the footprint of the building. It's my understanding they are not opening as a movie theater in our common sense or understanding. They're not going to be playing the same movies like Nemo playing at 30,000 theaters across the US. They are going to be playing specialty films having special events drawing tourists and unlike the previous mayor who was a mayor 30 years ago or however long We are not only a tourist town. We are here to serve the community, including the surrounding county area which is highly impacted from these activities at the city. Creek Road is a freeway again already because there is not enough space for all of this activity and it's spilling over.
Please protect us with outline or getting rid of the valet issue because these businesses are too big for their footprint. Thank you.
Thank you, Tina.
Next we have Larry Steingold followed by Renee.
First thing, Larry Steingold, Rachel Lang's constituent. I wish I was an Andrew Whitman's constituent, okay? But this is the second time he doesn't trust his own constituents or the city's constituents so I wish I was there to start doing something immediately. You can't understand me. Oh, sorry. The fact
that
Whitman does what? Louder.
Can you hear
me now? Yeah. Okay. Mr. Whitman doesn't trust his constituents or the city's constituents, number one. Number two, regardless of whether it's El Roblar or not this is distinctly targeting one business or many businesses so who put somebody up to this? Because quite honestly the mayor came out with a letter that it's gonna rip the soul out of Ojai and then Simply Ojai sues and she was supported by Simply Ojai so that's another tie together Okay, number one. But who put her up to this? Because it's either a former owner, a neighbor, a competitor or somebody who tried to buy the building and didn't do it but this also stifles a business for example and I'm not exactly sure of the details but let's assume it's a restaurant Okay, so what this does do is it stifles business.
Number one, it keeps places vacant. But I'm more concerned about where it came from. Anti-valet parking? Does anybody think about valet parking? No, only people who use valet parking, the kids who are doing the valet parking and the parking company in the business. This is like being against toilet paper. I mean, who thinks about valet parking? This isn't going to hurt anybody. And besides, it's on a private lot. But it's not the point. This is just another regulation to stifle growth or grow anything for example. It's just another regulation and this has been going on for 50 years. I like Ojai Small. I like it quaint okay but why not just come out and say it?
This is specifically to slow business, to slow growth, to slow anything Okay, it's just another ding. But just fess up to it and just admit it. No big deal. This is going to just keep it quiet but I'm more appalled at Mr. Whitman in not trusting the constituents. If you don't trust your constituents maybe you should resign. Thank you.
Larry can ask you a question? You mentioned a letter.
Yeah didn't you come out with a letter in the beginning that said where I'm against Valet parking?
No.
The first time, wasn't that a letter or something came out way back when in the beginning? That's how this whole started right? A letter? Not a letter thing to the paper I don't know but it didn't come up it said...
To clarify, I suggested that we take a poll. We had taken a poll about an emergency sign at the Y and got really good results. It would have cost nothing And so I put that on the agenda and three council members took it off, so we could not take the poll. And that would have been helpful. So I think that's maybe what you're
talking about? Maybe but the other thing that's more important is if everybody's so concerned about traffic and pedestrians and kids running across the street why not all just make a proposal to install the lights between Bonnie Lou's and the coffee connection so people don't have to run across the street, and they don't have to dodge
cars. Would that be nice? Thank you.
Please.
Our last raised hand we have Renee. Renee, you have the floor.
Thank you very much. I have to say that I agree with Barbara Bowman and Kim Barnes in this discussion. I think that you really should publicly tell us right now what your relationship is with the people who are filing this action against the city. You should publicly state, I disclose, I personally have had this person do this for me or this for me or this for me.
It would give me peace of mind and it would make me understand and trust that you understand your responsibilities As a elected official to not show preferential treatment to people who have worked on your campaign, raised money for you done all kinds of things. The other thing is I actually really believe that valet parking could be a really beneficial and helpful thing for certain people.
I've been in situations where I couldn't walk, I couldn't go anywhere, I couldn't do anything. I didn't have a handicapped parking spot and if there was valet parking to get downtown to go to an event, I would relish, I would love that! I think that would be beneficial for people to be able to access when they're handicapped When they're not able to get in and out when they can't move around. If I were Barbara Bowman, in fact, and I had that property, I would be filing for a permit to be able to get valet parking for the special events that are happening. And she, not that she's interested in making money but it is a service. And she is one of the few places who has private property down there who could do that. Why wouldn't that be allowed?
I'm just appalled that you're making valet parking something you cannot do, you're taking our rights away again. You don't have the right to do this and you only have a right to do it this way. I am really opposed to that kind of infringement and taking action on people's lives. And you're being blackmailed, it's really sad. So I'm really sorry to see us being renegaded to this kind of discussion from our city council members and being told you have to do it this way. It's really upsetting, thank you.
Thank you, Renee. Is that it Weston?
That's all Mayor.
Okay and just to clarify this doesn't apply to special events so you can still have off-site valley parking for special events correct?
The initiative is submitted by the proponents, exempts special events that obtain a city permit with limitations that it not be more than six times per year at the same location nor to residential uses. Also exempts residential uses utilizing valet parking on a non-commercial basis which I guess would be a party or
nonprofit event? All right, so that can still happen. All right thank you.
Mayor if I may we have one more raised hand Catherine Donwin on Zoom.
Okay thank you
Weston. Catherine you have the floor?
4:03 – 4:1330 turns
Okay yes hi sorry I raised my hand a little bit late but I just wanted to speak to Larry's comment. So in the March 25th 2022 Ojai Valley News article regarding the March 22nd Council meeting. Article goes on to say, Sticks reopened public comment on the parking agenda item over an appeal lodged by Haney and Wyrick so that she could explain that she put it on the agenda quote because it came to my attention that off-site valet parking has never been allowed in Ojai, and that the city does not have an ordinance that regulates valet parking.
She said she felt it was important to get input on this political change. We all want Ojai to hold onto its soul." And then fellow council members went on to say the idea that this is a fight for the soul of Ojai is one of the most atrocious things I've ever heard. Thank you. minutes from that meeting. And then I would just also like to add since I have some additional time, I do think this is a ridiculous thing to be addressing right now we have so much bigger problems in this city including the current crumbling of our public school system in this city that I think takes I think we have a far superior precedent over something like valet parking, which is property that these people already own.
Um, I think if we want to limit the footprint that businesses can operate within that is already something well within the Planning Commission's foresight and No reason we should be taking this much time. And I know for a fact that there have been suggestions made by constituents for resolutions to this, of using other private property to limit tourists driving through our town. I know for a fact that has been brought to some of you personally. So I would take that into consideration much more deeply than continuing to kind of beat this dead horse and I would like to reiterate This does feel very akin to blackmail. It just does not sit right with me. Thank you.
Thank you, Catherine. Is that it, Weston?
That's all
OK. And just to confirm this is this is there's a time essence that we we have to deal with this now, correct?
We have pending litigation
that
we need to respond to.
Right, the plaintiffs have agreed to provide through an agreed-upon stay pause in the litigation for four months through June to provide an opportunity to address Settlement proposals, if any are successful. Otherwise the city will have to respond answer the lawsuit and respond to it and decide to defend it or not as maybe
Which is why we need to talk about it now. Correct?
Could I ask a question? Yes. Okay, yes Leslie. What settlement is on the table? I'm sorry you said we have four months to come up with...
The settlement that's on the table as proposed and under consideration if the council adopts an ordinance that the plaintiffs then accept they would then dismiss the lawsuit okay thank you thank you Inherent in those are two key questions. Policy question, what ordinance if any does the council adopt? Pure legislative policy question for the City Council. Second, what do the plaintiffs accept?
And we will have a four month period with which to go through that process
We've presently negotiated a four-month period of pause in the lawsuit providing time for the policy process.
Okay, thank
you. Thank you. Okay we will move on to discussion now. Rachel?
Can I start this? Sure. So I want to address a couple of things. First of all it is true Leslie Hess is a supporter of my campaign and even though Legally, there would not be a violation if I were to proceed. I am aware of the fact that no matter what I vote, I'll be scrutinized and people could make the perception that I'm influenced in some way. So I have a thought about this.
And that is to what Bill Miley said, is that one way that we can avoid this whole question about shadow government or collusion or anything like that, one way we can avoid all of that conflict of interest is by actually having a parking study right now doing Nothing, but like including valet parking and the future of valet parking within an overall study that kind of takes it the conversation away from the lawsuit and away from this particular issue and makes it a broader topic. That involves community input that we're really addressing some of the long-term vision of what we want our downtown to be like In ten years in 15 years So that's just one thing I wanted to speak to Thank you.
Okay next
Susan if you could turn it into a motion, I would second it Oh If you could turn that into a motion, I would second it because I'm already on the parking committee as is James and As is Jamie from the chamber? And at one point we had other members or staff but I'd love to go back to having those meetings. I was 100% committed, we were doing some really good work and I think we made the right decisions. We made a big decision not to do something. I believe it was the right decision So yes, if you like
to turn it into a motion Okay. My I would like to make a motion that we That we since we still have four months before we respond to this that we do nothing right now and that we move forward with A community or work shopping in a future agenda item parking study Is that right? Is that parking
a
parking?
Well, could you say that something like make valet parking one of the issues in the Parking Study Committee.
Yes. So making valet parking one of the subjects in a parking committee.
One clarification if I may. Would it be to return to the council to direct the contours of the study, or would it be to refer it to the parking committee to have them develop the contours of the study to then come to council for council to approve? Yes. Go do that. And perhaps, remind me who's on the parking committee. I know Mayor Pro Tem Francina. So it
was myself, Mayor Pro Tem Francina, Jamie Fleming. It was Council Member Weirich but that was as a council member so we'd have to reappoint or appoint somebody to that. Right, that's what I was thinking, second council member. Or just come back to council. Well, that was the core group. Mm-hmm
And one point we we did have some other members kind of on the fringe Like Lenny clay from the Arts Center
We had them to advise on some issues that
way we worked really well as a small group But we could use another council member
mm-hmm so my question though is that if we've got It doesn't sound like anything concrete is going to come out of that within the four-month period. It doesn't sound to me like we would come up with something concrete within the four month period that the city currently has So that would be my concern, is that the litigation potentially marches on. We end up spending money on the litigation. We end up potentially having an initiative that adopts rules then the committee no longer gets to consider.
So I don't, I am 100% supportive of the idea that we do need to be active with our study of parking and maybe tourism in general in Ojai. How do we best adapt to the idea that we need a tourist economy but we also need to be able to live here like it's our You know our nice neighborhood home So that would be my concern is that the the lawsuit marches on And That proposal doesn't necessarily stop that from happening.
Do you want to make a motion? I
4:13 – 4:2631 turns
Well, I'm open to discussing. So I guess this...I still think we need to discuss but I think I'm open to the idea of passing an ordinance That just does the most basic thing. I don't know that that will satisfy the proponents of the initiative, but I see two very big problems with valet parking. One is when somebody pulls up to a valet stand If that's on Ojai Avenue or some other impacted street, then we have a horrible traffic problem there.
So we should regulate where you could potentially have a traffic stand and then the other is where do you park the cars? And I wouldn't want a valet parker to be using any of our public parking resources including residential streets, any of our city parking lots as the place to park cars. And if we adopted something like that then potentially your committee can work on a more detailed addressing of the valet parking issue
May I ask a question? I had no idea that what you're talking about is part of valet parking. I thought valet parking was linked to a business, it's not like you're just driving down the street and somebody's gonna park your car. What's a valet parking stand? Well
if there's a lot of places where if you go to a restaurant they take your car
Yes, okay I
see that.
I thought you sounded like you said somebody driving down Ojai Avenue and they see somebody that's going to park their car what do you mean we this is like that's Can I
say something? So the thing that I have an issue with valley parking, it doubles the trip. So say if you live on the east end, you're going to a restaurant downtown, you drop it off, that's one trip. The valley parks it, that's two trips. Then after then when you're ready about the third trip is when the valley gets to pick up your car and then the fourth trip You drive home. So that's doubly amount of traffic double the amount of wear and tear on our streets And so that does double it and then I also feel like as Tina quoted, you know, it's a
It's spillover into the Commons and
I We're a small town. We are not a city and I really feel like it's similar to the chain store ordinance It's about protecting our small-town culture and And not becoming a big city so and I think that because and also double with doubling the car trips is a reason why we could adopt this and then we can change it but the thing is if The other thing is 600 people signed that, which means 600 people don't want it.
Leslie? Well, 600 people signed it thinking they were thinking about the El Roblar. I would once again ask both Betsy Sticks and Rachel Lang to recuse themselves from any discussion on this issue. The plaintiff in front of us, most especially Betsy Sticks, she has been your treasurer, she's been your assistant treasurer, she's been your campaign supporter with cold cash for the three years that you have been running. I can't emphasize enough that you must recuse yourself.
You absolutely must recuse yourself. Rachel, you need to think about however you want to do it. You don't have the deep ties that Betsy has but these are once again astounding to me that you would sit there and not even consider it. You have deep relationships with the plaintiff for goodness sakes or whatever she is You shouldn't even be talking on this issue. You really shouldn't even be talking. It is the stain on this body that you are, really. There's no other example that could be clearer than what we're talking about
here. Actually can I finish? I disagree having been on council for a couple years and having lived in this town for a long, long time. We're all connected to everyone. So let me finish my let me finish my sentence. Um, so just in terms of
I say this in sorrow more than an anger. I really do. I say this much more in sorrow than I do
and uh, i've gotten um, you know the city attorney said No reason to recuse
no he didn't say that. He said no legal reason to recuse
please. No crosstalk
And that is correct. There is no legal reason to recuse on this fundamental policy question, thank
you. Susan and then Rachel? Well your perception of additional car trips is one scenario there are studies that say that valet parking reduces traffic about 20% but the other factor is this once people come to town If you want to reduce car trips and encourage alternative transportation, the fastest way to do it is don't provide parking. As soon as people that live three blocks away from the Arts Center figure out that they're going to be driving longer than it would have taken them to walk then they'll leave their car at home. So in many ways, this is a counterproductive measure. The tourists are going to be circling around parking on residential streets. That's what's happening now. I lived on North Ventura Street for eight years. There were always families, visitors parked in front of my house.
Not always but a great deal of the time especially The weekend during concerts, so this absolutely needs to be part of a bigger parking plan and a parking plan is just a segment of how we're going to handle transportation in this town. As when Council Member Whitman mentioned tourists, the biggest negative of tourism is the traffic. And we have failed as a council to handle it. We're little by little moving in the right direction. The hotels are you know I wrote articles for The Visitor's Guide in 1994 and 1996 they're still there come to Ojai for car-free vacation. You park once And then from there on, you walk, you bicycle.
That's what people want. That's why they go to Europe so they can experience a car-free vacation and we here are so lucky if we really wanna reduce emissions. I mean, I'm sorry to be sitting here. I'd much rather be getting up at seven o'clock in the morning and leading bike trains to school. We need to get back and I'm bored of the whole... This is just This is such a sad thing to be discussing in my mind. I'm sorry, the only good that can come of it is if we go back and focus on the bigger picture.
Okay well we have one motion. Yeah did you want
to read? I just wanted to say just one thing and that is that neither Ameristix nor I has hidden any donations that we've received all of that information by law is on the website, on the city's website. You can see all of our campaign donations and you can also see any in-kind donations. All of that is right there out in the open. And for all of us if you spend more than $2,000 in your account or on your campaign, you have to File that so And I want to go back to my motion because I think that making a motion That says that let's bring this up in a parking committee. Let's let's not do anything right now Let's have a bigger conversation Nick that motion negates Any of this conversation that we're having about a conflict of interest or about who needs to recuse themselves?
I Think this is a really important subject And and and so I'm gonna restate my motion that we do nothing on this right now and That we as soon as possible bring it up with a parking committee as a part of a bigger conversation about what? What parking looks like in our community?
Okay, so we have a motion. Do we have a second? Okay We have a second Okay, roll call please. Discussion on the
motion?
I thought
we had that. Did you want to say something? Yeah, I did want to say something. I don't think that your motion takes off the table what I'm looking at right now which is a conflict of interest and I refuse to say that it does. It doesn't. It does not take it off the table We're sitting here and making a decision. So that's my comment is that I do not believe that it does, and yes it is actually on the website. And I would wonder if any of us would know where the contributions came from if it weren't on the website.
This this is a non-issue Valet parking is a non-issue. If we were even to consider it an issue, I would have to agree that valet parking actually tends to help. It takes cars off of the streets. They're not going to park in front of your house. They're not going to drive around looking for a parking place. My dad who's in a walker would have a place to be able to drive up and get out and actually go someplace. So number one, I just think this whole idea To your point, yes. It actually saves vehicle miles traveled and I'm going to have to abstain from anything because you too should not be sitting here and I can't believe that you are so no matter what I'm going to ask you once again to recuse yourself most especially Mayor Sticks the clear conflict Legal maybe not ethical absolutely the state put a law in place to stop exactly this and you can choose That that law wasn't it doesn't apply to you because it didn't happen six months earlier But in fact, it does so my vote is going to be to abstain from any Contribution to this discussion at all because both of you should have recused yourselves
Can you repeat the motion Andy did you want to say something?
Yeah, so if we eliminated people who had support from a group, a political group then I would be the only person voting. That's not true? Because the Democratic Club You had, don't tell me you didn't have Jeffrey Starkweather running around your campaign.
I absolutely did not have Jeffrey Starkweather running around my campaign. Absolutely positively not.
So look if we're... That is
a
mischaracterization and you should
apologize for it. Please, I'm not going to apologize. No you're not but you should.
Please finish it. No cross talk please. I
4:26 – 4:3125 turns
am going to say something because it hasn't been said yet, but the issue of whether that law should be retroactive or not was considered by the legislature and they decided it should not be applied retroactively. So, I know you want to second guess what our state legislature said. But to suggest that you have ethics and Betsy or Rachel do not is really absurd especially after the stunt you pulled in giving confidential information provided us to us by an attorney to To the Becker group and the rest of the public. Let's bring it back to the agenda item. I have a comment here. And there is a law that says you cannot do that.
Do I have a comment here? Thank you very much. Let me see, where should I start? No, I have absolutely no conflict of interest. I paid for my entire campaign myself $250 worth of donation from three people okay So, I have no conflict of interest. I contacted the Democratic Club and told them that I had filed my papers. They never contacted me. They did ask me to come to a forum. I said yes. I had never met Jeffrey Starkweather. I'd never met anyone in the Democratic Club and was not a member of the Democratic Club. Okay, so to try to equate me with the Simply Ojai and what has occurred here I don't have three lawsuits pending in front of us with Simply Ojai. So you can attack me all you want Councilman Whitman but none of that is true not one word of it.
Let's keep it on the agenda item. This is the agenda item. We need to have transparency. Yeah we have a motion we have second Susan?
I feel, Rachel that you've made good faith effort to take it away from the lawsuit and all of that other stuff. And I hope we can vote on your motion. Can
I ask Councilmember Francina would you feel more comfortable with me recusing myself from this or with me being not a part of this conversation?
The way you worded your motion, I'm comfortable with it. Okay Thank you And I hope that we one of you will also serve on the parking committee. It's very interesting I know that you've already made the motion but it doesn't just include car parking includes all modes of transportation Parking including bicycle parking great.
Okay? All right. Well, we have a motion to second clear the roll call please Weston
Roll-call vote Passed 4–0 motion to second clear the roll call
Show transcript
Okay, thank you. All right
we will move on to item number five
Madam Mayor not to belabor the complex issue The parking committee at present only has one council member We would need counsel to add a second council member if there were desires else it would be just mayor pro tem Francina
Which is an option. You don't have to add a member, but you could choose to add a member. I will
volunteer myself to be on that.
It's
really interesting!
I mean, I find it super interesting.
Yeah. Thank you. I would love to work with Councilmember Francina also so... Great.
Okay we will move on to item number four. We'll open up the public hearing. Introduction of an ordinance amending the municipal code and adopting the Building Appeals Board recommendations for additional amendments to the building code.
Staff report. I'm actually going to recommend that we continue this to the March 28th meeting. I think it's an important item and the point is to have the public hearing, and it's late in the night so there's no time sensitivity. We had adopted our holdover ordinance already so this was just the next step. So I recommend continuing to March 28th if anybody is here to speak we can take those comments very quickly and then continue the public hearing
All right, thank you. All right, we'll move on to councilmember reports anything
So two questions there I think one is do we have any cards for that one? And at the same time Weston is anybody raising their hands for that item. Oh I think they both left.
We have one raised hand, if anyone is on Zoom to speak about item four? The building code
update with building appeals board. If we have one comment I would suggest letting them speak.
Open the public hearing ring.
Okay on zoom we have Larry Steingold followed by Rosalie Zabia and Renee.
And just for those people as well, so we will continue to March 28th is what we said. So there will be another opportunity to comment but we'll take whatever comment we have now.
4:31 – 4:3614 turns
Larry you've been asked to unmute are you there?
Yeah yes I just have one question. The 20% I believe because is that the right percentage if I read it correctly of construction What if the number is less? What if you can do the work for less? Are you required to spend 20% or 25%, whatever the percentage is, just out of curiosity on doing renovations.
Yeah, and I can answer that very quickly. The proposal that we will discuss more fully on the 28th would be to require 20% to go towards fire hardening. And so that is a firm 20%. Otherwise potentially everybody would just say that they got the repair done for cheaper but it
requires a 20%. Thank you on that, but would that mean that somebody would have to if all I had to spend was 5,000. Would I then have to just spend something on something else just to meet the minimum? If I could get the work done for five or whatever the number is 10 or 20, but it was 3000 short do I now have to get phony bills to raise the price? And I'm not being facetious on that, I'm just curious. Because if you can get the work done for 10%, 15% and are you forced to spend the other five?
Is that the last of your... Go ahead and get all your questions then I'll give an answer.
Well essentially it's, you're saying that the minimum I can spend is 20%. I have to spend it. So do you back into pricing
I can answer that. I can answer that. I want to make sure you're done with your comment, though.
Yes, I am. These are questions not
comments. And so thank you Weston. We'll pause that. So yes again the requirement would be 20% and if somebody says well I got this repair done it was only 10%, then they would have to there's a list of repairs and they would have to do other fire hardening improvements to get to that total of 20%. The idea, we won't get completely into it but the idea is we have a lot of housing stock that is 50 years old, 40 years old, 60 years old 100 years old. It's not built to modern fire code so all the new good fire code stuff we're doing applies for the new builds but A lot of the older houses, which is the majority of our houses aren't keeping up. So the proposal was to say that when somebody comes in for a repair that they would then have to do a couple of fire hardening improvements as well.
So we'll walk through that more on the 28th and explain it more fully when we have some time on that
meeting. Thank you very much.
Next we have Rene followed by Wayne Maynard. Rene? Do you know what I was saying? So.
Hello, thank you for your time on this. I live in a condo and we have a skylight that has a plastic dome covering it was here when we got here and I understand the plastic is really not a good material to have on your roof when we've got fire issues. And I live in a condo and I would like All of them, all of the residents to know that this is a fire hazard issue.
And I'm just wondering if there's something that could be done to say everybody who has certain conditions should by a certain date be required to have their fire hardening Home repairs done, just like we have where we you know people have to weed whack their weeds by a certain date in May or whenever it is. To me the fire hardening part is really really important.
And I know you've done your fire emergency preparedness planning. And I know that they were headed in the direction where they were going to require a certain amount of things be done by a certain date, but that just seems to have been laxed and moved back. And so it's kind of a softening requirement. There aren't really any hard requirements unless you do something, Initiate some kind of a repair. So I'm just wondering if there's any way to do an educational program about what are the things that are problems that are putting people at higher risk? And we should have everybody know about that and get them done by a certain date.
Just a suggestion.
Thank you, Renee.
Next we have Wayne Maynard. Wayne.
4:36 – 4:5157 turns
Wake up, Wayne.
Wayne you've been asked to unmute if you're there?
Okay yeah can you hear me? Yes okay thank you I'm going to save most of my comments for the next meeting but i do request that in the next staff report because uh that you include a strikeout and underline of the current title nine municipal code for these changes being proposed. I went onto the website and looked at the current Ojai Municipal Code, and it does not contain the current changes that were adopted on Ordinance 935. So I'd like to have a good document to work from to see what these changes are really going to make to the Title IX of our municipal code. And so I'll hold off my technical comments until that time. Thank you
much. We have one more, Rosalie Zabia.
Good evening, council and staff. I'm going to also reserve most of my comments for the next meeting but I would like to point out that I do believe that this ordinance would be violating state law in the sense that these types of fees are prohibited by the State of California as pertains to the construction of ADUs below 750 square feet I served on the Planning Commission between 2014 and 2018 when that first state ADU legislation came down, and the intent was very clear that public agencies cannot charge prohibitive fees in permitting ADUs. So I hope you will review that also before the next meeting. I think that's a really important point, and I'll save the rest of my comments for next time. Thanks so much.
Thank you, Rosalie.
That's all on Zoom.
Okay, all right. So we will table that for now and... To March 28th. All right. And we'll move on to council member reports? Anything to report out?
Yeah. There's two other items I do recommend with us having the public comment discussion on the next agenda. I think we can hold off on the priority setting workshop for now and I don't think... We just don't have enough time to really get to it tonight. But the item related to the Parks and Recreation Commission request, I think that one we can get through relatively soon.
Yeah.
I'll make a
motion.
So we'll
keep that one. We're looking at item number five, so Parks and Rec. Go
ahead. I'l make a motion to include the Park and Rec Committee on our team that's discussing Sioux
Okay.
And do you need two council members to replace the two that left?
It could be in the commission taking that role or it can be... Let them do it! Yeah, I think they really want to do it. I think we'll have a commission do that and then the one recommendation I would make is that whatever recommendation they come up with That we include bringing that back to the council. Yes, mostly just because working with the county I don't want to have You know different messages coming from different people to the county representatives so So with with that what that would be how he'd proceed We've let the Parks and Recreation Commission review it make recommendations come back to the council
Okay, can we do have one public comment on this item?
Oh Good evening, Bill Marley. So with the Park and Recreation Commission intensely involved in helping create and continue an outstanding slate of programs for our community, it's very appropriate that they be directly involved in the negotiations with county recreation staff in programming Soule Park. The recent recreation guide It's illustrated of the quality and the range of activities offered to our residents, and to the folks in the valley. So please agree... I know you're gonna do this but please agree to directly involve the department and the commission in the effort.
I was at their meeting when they decided they wanted to do this. Yeah, I was there. Let's do that. Okay. I like what
All right, any public comments on line question?
Yes. We had one raised hand from Larry Steingold. Larry?
Have mercy on us.
Maybe Larry didn't want to speak on this item.
Okay, all right we'll move on to discussion. We have a motion I
Want to just ask James something In the event that you need can the motion include that if you need a council member? That you can just ask rather than having to redo the whole process
Yeah, I don't think we would you're fine. We're pretty uncomfortable with it. Yeah If if a major decision comes up it's gonna come back to the whole yeah
Plus you can always ask us
exactly. Yeah.
Okay plus there's a liaison That's
a good point. We'll actually, and that will be fair and everything we'll make sure we'll use the liaison as questions come up.
Yeah okay is there a second? I second it. Okay all in favor um
i have a discussion i would like to um so exactly what is the park and rec department's contribution i mean can you explain to me is it everybody gets together and now they're also part of the group that's negotiating What are they negotiating? How far along are we in the negotiation? So what's that process look like, where are we and how and what happens when they join and we move forward.
Yeah so up till now We had a council committee of two council members those two council members and our rec supervisor And myself some of the time Met with the county team which includes our county supervisor and the County Parks and Recreation person. And So we've met with them. We negotiated a proposal the proposals in the packet and the proposal Has a couple of parts but the I think the key part is the one-year MOU between the city in the county to sort of open up Sewell Park with the city paying a fee of $58,000 that would replace the county gate entrance fees.
And then a secondary part of the contract is an agreement that the county and the city will work together to also kind of identify terms where the city could actually build additional pickleball courts at Sewell Park. So those are kind of the two main pieces My understanding is that the Parks and Recreation Commission wants to actually be able to review the terms that were negotiated, so I do want to make sure that's clear. And just as an example they had asked for some of the documentation from the county, some of the records of what fees they collected to kind of see if the fees that we're paying are in line with that Those are things we've looked at with the committee, but the Parks and Recreation Commission wants to see those so by Allowing our authorizing them to be part of that team Unless we are more specific The authorization would allow them to look at that and to come back and make a suggestion of any modifications to that proposals
So they would make a suggestion to our team or to the whole team? Including the Ventura County team as well.
My recommendation, that's where we kind of started is that And mostly it's just to not give the county whiplash where yeah, they've talked to five or six people and now there's five new people And you know different perspectives coming at them. My recommendation is that? To let the Parks and Recreation Commission investigate and then provide their recommendation back to the City Council. Okay And then the council would then approve that, and that way we're just sending one proposal to the county or one request.
Okay, thank you. That is what I would
agree with, yes. So I think if you ask the commission, I think they would like to even be a little more hands-on in directly working with the county. And that's an option for the council but I can tell you even just with the three or four of us that were talking to the county, we got that feedback of like, we need to talk to one person. So I think that would be an issue.
And given the fundamental multi-year budget and policy questions it may be best for the elected council to be that voice with the county?
Yes, thank you. All in favor of the motion? Aye. Okay all right we will move on so we're gonna postpone number six at this point okay now we can talk about council member reports anything to report out yeah Leslie
Yeah, the sanitation department is fixing their pipes. They're very happy about fixing their pipes and they got a ton of money in the bank, $25 million. So yeah, they're cruising. I'm trying to think if I went to an... But I might have gone to another meeting, I just can't think about it right now but anyway, I went to the sanitation department meeting and it was great
Okay
I'd just like to report on CPA. I'm on the executive board there and they had a lobby day with a representative from Steve Bennett's office, and it was really rewarding to be there because we got a great shout out from CPA having cutting-edge ordinance to reach greenhouse gas emissions reduction ordinance so that was nice. We're real beacon of sustainability yeah Anybody else?
Oh yeah. Is this the time to mention that Leslie and I attended a Zoom meeting with Lucas on the Cabrillo project, and you all received the press release. I want to mention people have already asked me about farm workers Any questions we can't discuss it, right? We can't discuss it but
not on tonight's agenda.
Okay, but okay The questions can be answered if you see concerns so they did ask if they could do a presentation 10-15 minute presentation 3d Understand that correctly They would like to do a virtual tour. It might take a while to get it on the agenda, but can they do a presentation? Because they were going to do it tonight. They were going to do three-minute presentation tonight, but I wasn't sure when the public comments would be on the agenda so they didn't come tonight. They're coming from Goleta and Santa Barbara.
So they could come, like anyone at any meeting for general public comment anytime. That would not include the ability to use technology. They couldn't project anything through the systems. If they wanted to do that such as a 3D tour of a rendering that's possible as a future agenda item two members of council can request it if you wanted to propose a date certain it would be a matter of agreement by three or more as to a date certain
If we don't have another presentation could we do it at the next meeting and Pending Council three council votes.
I think we have the fire chief challenge Italian chief
We had a request to introduce the new Ojai Fire Battalion Chief at the March 14th meeting. I don't believe we have anything scheduled for March 28, so that would be the next available. We do have something for the 1st in April.
So by that time will the plan have gone to community development?
Yes, that was my other question. I think we'll wait till they file their application
So you've, very briefly fundamentally there's two choices here. As I understand it they've asked for a presentation that's just a presentation presenting their project no action could be taken and every council member would need to refrain from saying anything at all about the project to prevent inevitable litigation so one thing to recognize is that temptation may be great to comment on the presentation
Yes.
That temptation is avoided entirely if there is no presentation and if they go through the process per our codes, another choice. We do not know when they will apply at some point we expect that they will apply based on the amount of their press release stating they're going to apply If they apply and when they apply, we'll process it in accordance with all applicable rules and regulations. Eventually it will come to the Planning Commission, probably be appealed from there to City Council, and then be before this body.
I say probably because I don't know what the Planning Commission will do and therefore I don'y know whoever is unhappy with that whether they appeal or not. But I had to bet it's coming to the council. Therefore, I very very very strongly caution all council members To refrain from ever stating a position on the project because it will come to you most likely
Doesn't it make more sense to wait until it comes to Council so we can actually talk about
that would be the other option Okay
4:51 – 5:0012 turns
Maybe we should speak with James tomorrow, you know in the next few days and just clarify the things you've told us just now because it's going to affect your meeting. Because you're saying that council members can't take... Okay so what is considered taking a position? We were going to when I say we Leslie is doing another meeting Her first meeting, congratulations was very successful. She's going to do a meeting on housing aid.
So I have set up a second forum on housing in Ojai and I was going to have them present their, you know, do a presentation at that housing forum on their project As an informational effort to communicate to the community what exactly is going on. So I didn't foresee that to be any sort of problem, they're simply going to present
I would appreciate the opportunity to discuss that in detail with you, not in this space. In this space, I will state that the risk is for a project for which an applicant or an appellant or both have a due process right to an unbiased decision maker, which is not a project that is legislative. So any project requiring its own change of development agreement is not what I'm about to talk about. If a project is legislative, council members are elected to have a position. You may have a position at will if a project is not legislative And they haven't applied. Cabrillo hasn't applied yet, so I don't know what they're applying for because they haven't submitted any plans or applications. I expect based on their press release that they are going to take the position that their project is not legislative.
If it's a quasi-judicial project like that then every council member needs to avoid taking a position which means stating an opinion positive or negative about the project in advance, in order to preserve the ability to vote on the project. So a presentation that you at a forum that you're hosting without city money to receive information is fine but you'll have to not say anything regarding your position on the project.
Of course. So if you would like to talk about that more specifically, I'm happy to do so. I think that may be helpful. I understand your caution and certainly we'll take it... We'll be very... I would be very, very, very careful.
And just to emphasize the point, the reason to do so is to prevent opponents of whatever position you have on either side will try to force you off.
Right. Got it.
It helps you by
saying that. I don't want to be forced off. So I actually did have one other thing that I have been meaning to talk about. The Green Coalition has got a grant to re-envision the eight acre City Hall campus with some exemptions about buildings that can't be touched, so they came to my first forum and I am their liaison So they asked me just to let you guys know about their upcoming events. They have done two tours, they have a survey on their website where they are trying to collect community information about what the community would like this to be. I know Susie you went to the first one and I went to the second one so they toured through the campus and talked about potentially what it could be And they have three more events coming up. One is March 22nd, and these are...
Oh gosh, I need to... Is that the food one? The World Food? The World Cafe! The World Cafe is a particular type of process that you use to come to community understanding about what you would like this to be. So they call it a World Cafe, but it's also a process by which the community walks through an envisioning process. So they have that on March 22nd, which is a Wednesday 530 to 6 you can come and get dinner and sign in. Six to nine will be the meeting where everybody will be envisioning in this World Cafe model. April 8th is Saturday.
Let's see breakfast 830 to 9 is breakfast and sign-in. Nine to 12 is the meeting And then June 3rd, I think is the final sort of bringing it all together for the two previous meetings and all of the survey information that they've gathered to come up with some sort of recommendation from the community and them. And that's June 3rd. And let's see there's a community pot, 10 to 1130 and then there's the community potluck on March 22nd and April 8th childcare will be provided So and it will be at Kent Hall, and they would love to have the participation of any and all council members. And I'm sure staff and our public servants as well to come and help envision what this eight acres could possibly be.
I didn't actually finish my turn. Oh, sorry! It's okay. I mean it was okay with me. Remember the...I don't know if you're following all the mountain lions that are roaming through town So I contacted myself, somebody thankfully contacted me because I can't do this by myself. But to make a long saga short we're going to have another event the last one was there are people waiting people couldn't get in it was so popular with Beth Pratt and possibly people from well different various wildlife groups I'm not going to announce the date yet because it's fairly soon so that we educate the community about, we need to do it again. Because obviously after that horrific incident and there is so much that we need to learn and we want to reach out also not just to grown-ups but to the kids that needs to be part of education So that will happen in the next meeting.
I'll be able to give the details, I may even have a flyer. That's one of my little side projects and the rest can wait. I went to my first Ventura County transportation meeting It was my first Friday of the month. I thought I would be out of there at 1030 and it went until past 12 but I really, really enjoyed it because it looks like all the things that I was talking about in the 90's have become mainstream so it was great. I just enjoyed it. The next meeting is on Friday in Santa Paula at the train station. They try to make these meetings really fun which
Thank you City Manager's report.
So mine is just combined with the Well, actually there is one before I get to future agenda items So from this last storm which is still going on but it seems like we're through the bulk of it We had our Storm Patrol out and on and kind of cruising the streets and checking out drains and all those things Throughout the storm and so thank you to them and we had very good results And we didn't have any major issues. And then of course, thank you to the police Department who are also roaming the streets I think chief Newman said that they were very bored because everybody was staying inside but But we did have our people out and and patrolling But it does look like second big storm in a row that within the city we came out of it pretty fortunate.
So so That was the big news. Hopefully the next big news will be seeing the lake numbers rising and the ground basin numbers rising but moving on to future agenda items on the next agenda is Right now we have the presentation from the fire introducing the Fire Battalion Chief. We have four items right now, the Drowned Street Demonstration Project, the Tiny Home Program Annual Report back, our Planning Department Annual Progress Report and earlier today we added the Public Comment Protocol Discussion so those are the four items currently scheduled on the next agenda of March 14
Microphone
5:00 – 5:1157 turns
Is
rent stabilization ready to come back?
We have prepared that so it can be, we'd be able to get it back
on. Okay is there a council consensus majority to bring it back? I'd also like
to, we've heard and we have been trying for weeks and weeks and weeks to get a housing community
committee
Committee together and get it on the agenda. Um, and I think that you know if we do that there are housing Items that could be rolled into that and we would kind of in one fell swoop Start thinking about things much more holistically and on systems thinking So I would say that that is for me probably the highest priority because this is the third meeting That we've talked about it and thought that we had something going with it And I think the community is ready for it, and it could be a model for us to start thinking holistically about things. So I would offer that that to me is the highest priority right now.
I would, I hear you Leslie. Rent stabilization is the best thing we can do as a council to keep people from being gentrified out of their homes and all we have to, it's the second we get to look at it, we've already talked about it so is there a council majority
I would Agree with councilmember rule that it's more important to approach it holistically. I've learned so much more about the pros and cons of rent Stabilization since that meeting and in fact, I'm meeting with different people about it. I do not believe That it's the single most important thing we can do. It's just a piece of the puzzle and I believe it'll only work if we address the whole pie.
There isn't a meeting in this city, you know because people are getting pushed out right and left. Can I hear from Council Member Whitman?
I'd support bringing it back, but you know subject to when James
Rachel
best fitted in.
I mean, I think we need both of these topics I've been a proponent for getting the committee on the calendar and I also think finishing rent stabilization is a top priority So, I mean I would almost rather see them both together on an agenda because they relate to one another and
Oh, I hate to do this to Council Member Francina but maybe we push the only one of those the other items that are not time-sensitive that we could push back is the tiny home report back. I don't
need to hear
it.
You can just mail that to us. And
so we were working on that for March 14th But the bulk of that is I need the designer to come walk everybody through it and he hasn't confirmed that date So we're gonna go with probably March 28th Okay
Okay, so we have both rent stabilization and housing committee. So I'll
pull off tiny home program annual report and we'll...so now just to recap Drown Street Demonstration Project, the Planning Department Annual Progress Report which is a state mandated report, Public Comment Protocol, Housing Committee, and Rent Stabilization those will be the five items.
Can we confirm that though James in our meeting?
Do
we need to
vote in order to make sure that it doesn't change? If there's consensus right now from everybody, that's good enough for me. Can I make
a request that we make a decision now on public comments before we have to repeat what we've done the last two meetings?
For this next meeting so that we don't have to have the debate again? I think that what I would have done if we hadn't discussed it was go with the same thing we agreed on today, which is the 8 o'clock. That's what it is unless the council wants to direct otherwise right now.
I would vote just keep it the way it is right now or the way we did it tonight. Yeah, I thought it worked well. Okay, and then James you and I will
obviously it'll be on the agenda to discuss for future
Do we need to take a vote because I would vote no on that. I would say once again that the most important thing that we have And the most important thing that we have is public comment The most important thing our constituents have is the ability to speak to us as a group and even eight o'clock We knew we were calling people and they weren't here They had gone So once again, I may be in the minority but to me there is nothing more important than having your constituents come up and talk to you about the things that matter to them whether or not it's on the agenda. And more in sorrow than an anger, I just do not believe pushing it back to eight o'clock is fair to our constituents so I would vote no on it.
I'm going to vote no also. I like it at the beginning, because tonight it worked out fine but that won't always be the case.
Okay well we have three votes for 8 o'clock
Or one other thing we could do is have the public comments discussion first and then have public comments. So rather than saying it's at a certain time, we can say let's have this discussion and then let's make public comments after this discussion so that way It kind of keeps us a little bit. It gives us the flow and the flexibility, but it also gives us a chance to accomplish something before we do the public comments.
I would agree with that for this is for the one time to get the public comment conversation going and allow the public to actually comment on the public comment since we had said that we would open that up so I would second. Yeah, I would second that
motion with gratitude. That does sound like a long meet. Well, I mean and also of course James when we meet can we go over the agenda and see what makes sense right? Yeah Okay Wait,
all right So so see what makes sense meaning what I mean if we need to lock it down with three votes Then we need to lock it down with three votes. So what are we making sense is making sense? OK, so the ordering of the agenda. But we just talked about having comments and comments about comments at the beginning. So is that the one thing we're saying is not negotiable?
If there's a consensus, that would not be negotiable.
Okay, so I would I am voting yes on that. Yes. Okay, so thank you
So we have Which tonight we covered one agenda item before 8 o'clock and so I think it's actually probably Half a dozen to the other but this way is It clears the air for, like before the meeting and during the meeting and after the meeting. I think it's the... Like I said, I think it would end up being about the same anyway.
Okay, and can I just point out that? everything we heard Today was people wanted the comments at the beginning every except for one person one person maybe two But I think one everybody Consensus across the board when in public comments at the beginning and I think that we should consider a 30-minute hard stop at 30 minutes. That is a compromise, I think that we can do. The public does not want to be pushed back and there's just no way to get around that. Well, we're going to talk about it
next
week. And if I could just say that there are a lot of people who don't feel comfortable saying that in public who've called me personally. You know, I have this place on my website where you can sign up for time to talk and people have done that for the last two weeks saying thank you Yeah, so there's a quiet. There's a quiet group of people who actually loved the civility and I don't think their voices are often represented So I hear what you're saying. I think it really is like yeah. Yeah, I actually Public comments about this Okay.
And I did hear from a lot of people after the last meeting and they were really grateful that we got through so much business and they liked it that way. So anyway, but we're going to talk about... But this is
unusual!
We're going to talk about it at the next meeting.
Normal public comments are not like this, okay? It seems like we're gonna have one rule now Down the road a year from now we can go back to at the beginning So right, but I have a question of the city. So
given that we've decided to have that discussion in the next meeting Yes,
okay. Can I ask a question? This is a safety question We don't do and I just saw that you put drown Street back on the agenda and And I mean, I don't know what's happened there. But my concern is if safety of crosswalks on Ojai Avenue keeps coming up and I keep meaning to go to town and try to cross the street in the dark but isn't that... Why does that? That doesn't have to be on the agenda. That's up to Public Works or someone to go look to see if they're safe because somebody else was almost hit
Yeah, if we heard that there's a safety issue. We've been hearing about
this for so long!
We have not had any reports of them recently. So if you're hearing them tell them to send them to us or get on the MyOhai app and submit them to us.
They're
District 4. It depends on what the ask is I know that there was an ask for a while to install lighting systems on their crosswalks and that is a bigger request
Can we have someone from the city go there at night? My request is go there. Someone from the city, go there at night with a couple of kids and cross the street in the dark and...
I'm not going to ask them to take kids out in the dark. We're not involving children. We can kneel down and pretend.
All right, well thank you all for being here We're all into the council
protocol